Generally nice work on this assignment. Most people scored in the 3.0 range and up. And no fatals! Keep up your fact-checking habits.
And let's make sure we're giving ourselves a cushion in meeting deadlines. One person came within just 82 seconds of missing their deadline, according to the time stamp on the email.
(Please keep in mind; the official time is the time at which I receive it, according to the email time stamp. It's not necessarily the time you sent it. So, the closer you send to the deadline, the more likely it is to miss being received in time)
And a missed deadline -- even if it's just one second late -- is an automatic fatal.
Again, that's not to be a dick. Rather, in journalism we always have to meet our deadlines, since our news products are deadline-based. Ever see the 11 p.m. news start out with "Hey, our scripts aren't ready; tune back in a minute or two"?
Me neither. That's because we get into good habits that allow us to NEVER, EVER miss a deadline, or even send something right at deadline (because an anchor can't read a script starting at exactly 11 p.m. if it's also sent at exactly 11 p.m.).
Our jobs simply don't allow it.
I never received stories from two people. That's an automatic 0.0. And again, in journalism it's totally unacceptable.
Even if you turn in the worst piece of crap ever, as long as it makes deadline and has no fact errors it's far more preferable than filing nothing.
Two reasons for that: first, an editor can work with a piece of crap and massage it to life, but an editor can't work with nothing.
Second, regardless of how bad a story may be, a story on a newsworthy topic must be filed and shared with the audience. If there's a football game, the audience is going to expect a football game story after the game, period. You don't have a choice of not offering one.
And the page in the newspaper and the air time on the news show have to be filled. You can't just run a blank space or dead air.
Not turning something in at all is the quickest way to lose your job in this biz. That's why I'm strict on this rule in this class, to reinforce the point while the stakes are fairly low (an assignment grade) as opposed to you learning it when the stakes are high (your job and career).
Let's get this right every time, folks.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Missing: Different Types of Lede/Nut Graf Combos
Most of you were direct and to the point in your ledes and then built
upon that fact with a nut graf that helped answer questions created by
the lede, like this:
In 2011 in Michigan alone, a total of 57,152 people were reported missing at one time or another, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
Among the people missing are crime victims, runaway adolescents, people with Alzheimer's disease, distant parents, people who have tried to run away from their debt and people who have run away with lovers.
And that was fine. The lede established the basic premise of the story in a simple and direct manner. And then the nut graf that helped answer questions created by the lede, like, "why do they disappear?"
Some of you tried to take things a step further by looking at the basic fact AND a telling subfact, like, "who is it that disappears?":
Troubled youths and runaways make up for three-fourths of the 57,152 missing people reported in Michigan last year, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
Out of Michigan's missing, 48,384 people were found with another 9,000 still missing. Police estimate that people missing involuntarily total no more than 100 in number.
Here, the nut graf expands on details by looking at how many of the 57,000 plus are still gone, and how many of those are gone against their will. It drills down into that 57,000-plus number a bit.
A few of you tried an anecdotal lede. This one had a lede that covered tw grafs offering a personal anecdote symbolic of the larger problem, and then the third (nut) graf hits on that broader problem in a tone that sounds like a traditional straight lede:
Sabrina, a 14-year-old East Lansing resident and former runaway juvenile, is just one of the thousands of Michigan residents who have been rediscovered after earlier being reported as missing.
When Sabrina's parents divorced, she skipped town and moved to New York t get away from an abusive stepfather. Sabrina was discovered two years after she was reported missing after New York City police picked her up for shoplifting and prostitution, said Sabrina, who spoke on the condition her last name not be used.
According to the U.S. Justice Department, of the 57,152 men, women and children reported missing in Michigan last year, nearly 9,000 remain missing. Three-fourths of Michigan's total missing persons last year were runaway juveniles.
Here's another ambitious anecdotal lede:
Fourteen-year-old Sabrina just needed to escape.
Escape from her parents' divorce.
Escape from her stepfather, who would get drunk and hit her mom.
Just escape.
Sabrina, who spoke on the condition her last name not be used, is among the 42,864 juveniles in Michigan who went missing last year, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
Now, there's one way I think I could enhance these ledes, and that's with a telling quote from Sabrina that would help humanize the voice and perspective. In the case of an anecdotal lede, the best place for a telling quote is between the lede and nut graf, and not after the nut graf like in a more traditional approach.
Which lede/nut graf combos do you like, or hate? And why?
In 2011 in Michigan alone, a total of 57,152 people were reported missing at one time or another, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
Among the people missing are crime victims, runaway adolescents, people with Alzheimer's disease, distant parents, people who have tried to run away from their debt and people who have run away with lovers.
And that was fine. The lede established the basic premise of the story in a simple and direct manner. And then the nut graf that helped answer questions created by the lede, like, "why do they disappear?"
Some of you tried to take things a step further by looking at the basic fact AND a telling subfact, like, "who is it that disappears?":
Troubled youths and runaways make up for three-fourths of the 57,152 missing people reported in Michigan last year, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
Out of Michigan's missing, 48,384 people were found with another 9,000 still missing. Police estimate that people missing involuntarily total no more than 100 in number.
Here, the nut graf expands on details by looking at how many of the 57,000 plus are still gone, and how many of those are gone against their will. It drills down into that 57,000-plus number a bit.
A few of you tried an anecdotal lede. This one had a lede that covered tw grafs offering a personal anecdote symbolic of the larger problem, and then the third (nut) graf hits on that broader problem in a tone that sounds like a traditional straight lede:
Sabrina, a 14-year-old East Lansing resident and former runaway juvenile, is just one of the thousands of Michigan residents who have been rediscovered after earlier being reported as missing.
When Sabrina's parents divorced, she skipped town and moved to New York t get away from an abusive stepfather. Sabrina was discovered two years after she was reported missing after New York City police picked her up for shoplifting and prostitution, said Sabrina, who spoke on the condition her last name not be used.
According to the U.S. Justice Department, of the 57,152 men, women and children reported missing in Michigan last year, nearly 9,000 remain missing. Three-fourths of Michigan's total missing persons last year were runaway juveniles.
Here's another ambitious anecdotal lede:
Fourteen-year-old Sabrina just needed to escape.
Escape from her parents' divorce.
Escape from her stepfather, who would get drunk and hit her mom.
Just escape.
Sabrina, who spoke on the condition her last name not be used, is among the 42,864 juveniles in Michigan who went missing last year, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
Now, there's one way I think I could enhance these ledes, and that's with a telling quote from Sabrina that would help humanize the voice and perspective. In the case of an anecdotal lede, the best place for a telling quote is between the lede and nut graf, and not after the nut graf like in a more traditional approach.
Which lede/nut graf combos do you like, or hate? And why?
Missing: The News Is The News!
News isn't that something happened or took place. It's what, exactly, happened or took place.
Let's consider this pretend lede from a football game story:
MSU played Notre Dame in a football game Saturday.
That lede doesn't work, right? That's because the news isn't that a game was played; it's what happened at the game, something like MSU beat Notre Dame 84-0 on Saturday.
In the same way, this not-pretend lede doesn't work, either:
The U.S. Department of Justice reveals the statistics of Michigan residents once reported as missing.
The news isn't that the justice department revelaed statistics; the news is what those statistics were! So a better lede would have said something like, The U.S. Department of Justice found more than 57,000 Michigan residents were reported missing last year.
What you're missing in each case is ultimate outcome and end result: who won or lost the game, and by how much in the former; how many people are missing in the latter.
So if you're covering a city council meeting, for example, the news isn't that there was a meeting, or even that they discussed a specific issue at the meeting; it's what action took place regarding the issue at the meeting.
Let's be sure we're hooking our stories and our basic ledes on what happened, and not just that something happened.
Let's consider this pretend lede from a football game story:
MSU played Notre Dame in a football game Saturday.
That lede doesn't work, right? That's because the news isn't that a game was played; it's what happened at the game, something like MSU beat Notre Dame 84-0 on Saturday.
In the same way, this not-pretend lede doesn't work, either:
The U.S. Department of Justice reveals the statistics of Michigan residents once reported as missing.
The news isn't that the justice department revelaed statistics; the news is what those statistics were! So a better lede would have said something like, The U.S. Department of Justice found more than 57,000 Michigan residents were reported missing last year.
What you're missing in each case is ultimate outcome and end result: who won or lost the game, and by how much in the former; how many people are missing in the latter.
So if you're covering a city council meeting, for example, the news isn't that there was a meeting, or even that they discussed a specific issue at the meeting; it's what action took place regarding the issue at the meeting.
Let's be sure we're hooking our stories and our basic ledes on what happened, and not just that something happened.
Missing: Don't Forget The Obvious
What's missing from this lede?
There is more missing than you think in the state of Michigan, with 57,1252 reported last year by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Here's the problem: what is missing? People? Cars? Cats? What?
Let's not overlook the obvious, and let's make sure that ledes have all the information that is critical to understanding the basic gist of the story.
There is more missing than you think in the state of Michigan, with 57,1252 reported last year by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Here's the problem: what is missing? People? Cars? Cats? What?
Let's not overlook the obvious, and let's make sure that ledes have all the information that is critical to understanding the basic gist of the story.
Missing: How Do You Know ...
... so many people went missing last year? Did you count them yourself? Did you just make it up?
No. You got that from the U.S. Justice Department, right?
Well, how are your readers supposed to know that? Through attribution, of course.
So, offer the data and then attach, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
How do you know Jason Abare was found after a drunk driving arrest to have skipped out on child support? Were you riding shotgun with him and saw the whole thing go down?
Of course not. You know because he told you. So, if you were paraphrasing Abare's situation, you needed to say, Abare said. Pretty much everything not witnessed by you should have some sort of attribution. He said; she said; according to records; whatever.
Make sure you have properly attributed everything in your story. Basically, every paragraph after the lede and nut graf should have some sort of attribution affixed to it.
I know that's gonna look a bit weird, having graf after graf with so-and-so said this and this other dude said that and so on. But we do it as journalists to make sure that readers know exactly where we got our information. It promotes transparency and illustrates the factual basis for a story.
Over the next few days, when you're doing your daily newspaper readings please note attribution. See how frequent it is. See how writers offer it. Get a sense of how it's supposed to look in a finished product.
No. You got that from the U.S. Justice Department, right?
Well, how are your readers supposed to know that? Through attribution, of course.
So, offer the data and then attach, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
How do you know Jason Abare was found after a drunk driving arrest to have skipped out on child support? Were you riding shotgun with him and saw the whole thing go down?
Of course not. You know because he told you. So, if you were paraphrasing Abare's situation, you needed to say, Abare said. Pretty much everything not witnessed by you should have some sort of attribution. He said; she said; according to records; whatever.
Make sure you have properly attributed everything in your story. Basically, every paragraph after the lede and nut graf should have some sort of attribution affixed to it.
I know that's gonna look a bit weird, having graf after graf with so-and-so said this and this other dude said that and so on. But we do it as journalists to make sure that readers know exactly where we got our information. It promotes transparency and illustrates the factual basis for a story.
Over the next few days, when you're doing your daily newspaper readings please note attribution. See how frequent it is. See how writers offer it. Get a sense of how it's supposed to look in a finished product.
Missing: Did You ...
. . . use Sabrina Diaz's last name?
Why? Didn't you promise her that you would not?
If you didn't use her last name, did you tell readers WHY you weren't?
In our "Elements of Journalism" lectures, we talked about being transparent with readers. Part of that transparency includes telling readers why we aren't fully identifying somebody.
You really needed a disclaimer like . . .
. . . said Sabrina, who spoke on the condition that her last name not be used.
Why? Didn't you promise her that you would not?
If you didn't use her last name, did you tell readers WHY you weren't?
In our "Elements of Journalism" lectures, we talked about being transparent with readers. Part of that transparency includes telling readers why we aren't fully identifying somebody.
You really needed a disclaimer like . . .
. . . said Sabrina, who spoke on the condition that her last name not be used.
Missing: Second References
In first references, we often use the full title of an organization, in caps: the U.S. Justice Department, Wayne State University, ect.
But in subsequent references -- after we established the group in the first reference -- we can use a generic version in lower case or an appropriate common acronym: the justice department, the department, WSU, the university, ect.
But in subsequent references -- after we established the group in the first reference -- we can use a generic version in lower case or an appropriate common acronym: the justice department, the department, WSU, the university, ect.
Missing: Uh, Well ...
Some of you used quotes where the interview subject stammered. Like here:
"So, uh, I met this guy who was moving to New York. He didn't want to take me, said I was too young, but I, uh, got him to change his mind."
You may find the information to be useful, but the "uh's" are awkward. You have options on how to handle this.
First, you can translate the quotes into paraphrases, like this:
She said she met a man who was moving to New York City who didn't want to take her because she was too young, but she convinced him to change his mind.
Or, you could use quote fragments to work around the "um's" like this:
She said she "met this guy who was moving to New York. He didn't want to take me, said I was too young," but she "got him to change his mind."
Having a poorly-constructed quote doesn't mean you have to use a poorly-constructed quote. Our goal is to provide clarity to the reader, and the best way to do that is via a quote so the reader can see the subject's actual words.
But in lieu of that, making sure the information is clear and concise will suffice, as long as it's contextually correct and factually accurate and properly attributed.
"So, uh, I met this guy who was moving to New York. He didn't want to take me, said I was too young, but I, uh, got him to change his mind."
You may find the information to be useful, but the "uh's" are awkward. You have options on how to handle this.
First, you can translate the quotes into paraphrases, like this:
She said she met a man who was moving to New York City who didn't want to take her because she was too young, but she convinced him to change his mind.
Or, you could use quote fragments to work around the "um's" like this:
She said she "met this guy who was moving to New York. He didn't want to take me, said I was too young," but she "got him to change his mind."
Having a poorly-constructed quote doesn't mean you have to use a poorly-constructed quote. Our goal is to provide clarity to the reader, and the best way to do that is via a quote so the reader can see the subject's actual words.
But in lieu of that, making sure the information is clear and concise will suffice, as long as it's contextually correct and factually accurate and properly attributed.
Squirrels: Ledes I Liked
The good news with the squirrels exercise is, no fatals! Congrats to all.
Additionally, you guys took different lede/nut graf approaches, offering a sampling of different ways to do the story. Here's a few examples. This first one was a basic lede/nut graf that did the job well. The lede summed up the problem; the nut graf detailed the consequences, and then you launch into the individual examples of squirrel-insipred woe:
-->
Students,
teachers and staff members have faced repair bills amounting to hundreds of
dollars after squirrels began nesting in their cars.
Here, you did an anecdotal lede that took several grafs before getting to the nut graf:
-->
-->
University officials have determined that
squirrels are to blame for the issues students, teachers and staff members have
been experiencing with their vehicles.
-->
-->
-->
Additionally, you guys took different lede/nut graf approaches, offering a sampling of different ways to do the story. Here's a few examples. This first one was a basic lede/nut graf that did the job well. The lede summed up the problem; the nut graf detailed the consequences, and then you launch into the individual examples of squirrel-insipred woe:
-->
Lansing Community College officials
are blaming squirrels for a recent run of car damage across campus.
-->
Here, you did an anecdotal lede that took several grafs before getting to the nut graf:
-->
For the past few weeks, Oliver
Brookes couldn’t figure out why one headlight on his van refused to work.
Despite having it
replaced, the associate professor of English at Lansing Community College said he had continual problems with the headlight in his van. When he opened up
the hood to poke around, he was greeted by more than just wires and machinery.
“There
was a big squirrel’s nest in the corner where the light wires were,” he said.
Lately,
squirrels have been causing quite the hassle for many LCC
students and staff members by finding refuge under the hoods of cars.
In these next two, you had some fun with word play with fun alternate ledes followed by more to-the-point nut grafs:
Nutty car problems have been
occurring for the student body and faculty members of Lansing Community College
this past school year.
... and ...
Problems with your car? A furry
friend may be the cause.
College
officials at Lansing Community College are blaming squirrels for car problems
being had by students, teachers, and staff members.
... and ...
Students,
teachers, and staff members at Lansing Community College are going nuts
courtesy of many problems caused by a familiar animal: the common squirrel.
Officials at LCC
are blaming squirrels for an influx of car problems affecting individuals who
work at and attend the institution.
And these silly ledes are okay. Why? Because this is a silly story. It's not because of your writing preference; it's because the tone is true to the facts. And the facts are unexpected and weird and yes, silly.
As long as you let the facts dictate the tone, then you're doing it based not on opinion but on factual context.
Each of these ledes is a good, solid lede. But which ones do you think worked best? And why?
With each of these lede/nut graf sequences, the writers followed by offering the fact/quote sequences that we talked about earlier. So does this story -- which I will show you in its complete form -- that starts with an alternative lede, then goes to two nut grafs, then launches into the compartmentalized individual examples. This is a good structure which to aspire to:
In Lansing, there is a new addition
to the squirrel’s diet — electrical wires.
The squirrels on Lansing Community
College’s campus have been making homes and feeding on the electrical wires in
cars on campus.
The damage from the squirrels is
costing students and staff money to replace ruined wires.
LCC dietitian
Linda Kasparov said an attendant at a service station found a squirrel’s nest as
the cause of broken a oil-pressure gauge, speedometer and headlights on
Kasparov’s car.
“The attendant put up the hood and then jumped
back exclaiming, ‘My God, what have you got in there!’” Kasparov said.
Kasparov said the attendant found
three baby squirrels in a nest built of string, sticks and plastic bags.
Kasparov said the damage cost her more than $400.
Laura Ruffenboch, a wildlife
professor at LCC, said the soybean-based insulation on
many electrical wires may be appealing to the squirrels.
Ruffenboch said squirrels building
nests in a car which is used regularly is an uncommon phenomenon.
Oliver Brookes, an associate professor
of English at LCC, also said he found a squirrel’s nest
under the hood of his car.
“There was a big squirrels nest in
the corner where the light wires were,” Brookes said.
Brookes said the squirrels chewed
through the headlight wiring in his car, which cost more than $180 to replace.
Squirrels: Show Me, Don't Just Tell Me
Many of you were very light in offering quotes. Why?
Quotes are good. Quotes allow us to elaborate on things and to put a human voice in the conversation and to give readers the confidence that they're not just taking your word for it; there's somebody else saying something to support what you're claiming.
Look at the way a quote graf helps support and build upon the first graf in this sequence:
After pulling into a gas station to get help, Kasparov said the attendant found a nest containing three baby squirrels under Kasparov's hood.
"The attendant put up the hood and then jumped back exclaiming, 'My God, what have you got in there?'" Kasparov said.
The first graf tells your readers, based on your summarization of events. The second graf shows your readers, via the direct words of a direct particpant.
Don't just tell readers. Show them.
Quotes are good. Quotes allow us to elaborate on things and to put a human voice in the conversation and to give readers the confidence that they're not just taking your word for it; there's somebody else saying something to support what you're claiming.
Look at the way a quote graf helps support and build upon the first graf in this sequence:
After pulling into a gas station to get help, Kasparov said the attendant found a nest containing three baby squirrels under Kasparov's hood.
"The attendant put up the hood and then jumped back exclaiming, 'My God, what have you got in there?'" Kasparov said.
The first graf tells your readers, based on your summarization of events. The second graf shows your readers, via the direct words of a direct particpant.
Don't just tell readers. Show them.
Squirrels: FYI On Acronyms, BTW
Many of you referred to Lansing Community College in first reference. And in most first cases,
it's best to spell out the full title of an entity.
But how do you handle subsequent references?
You have a few options. One is to refer to the college in the generic, like I just did: as the college, lower-cased.
A second option would be to consider using an acronym, if there is a common acronym for the group. 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). In this case, the correct acronym is LCC.
If an acronym is well-known -- like NASA or FBI or USA -- then generally it is acceptable in a second reference, or even in a 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.
But how do you handle subsequent references?
You have a few options. One is to refer to the college in the generic, like I just did: as the college, lower-cased.
A second option would be to consider using an acronym, if there is a common acronym for the group. 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). In this case, the correct acronym is LCC.
If an acronym is well-known -- like NASA or FBI or USA -- then generally it is acceptable in a second reference, or even in a 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.
Squirrels: How Do You Know ...
... Brookes spent $184 to get his car's wiring replaced?
Were you there when he had the wiring replaced? No.
Did you pay for the repair bill? No.
So, how do you know?
It's because he said so, right?
So, why not let readers know your sourcing? Brookes said he spent $184 to get his car's wiring replaced?
How do you know Kasparov was driving home one night when her car fritzed out? Because she said! So add "she said" as attribution.
How do you know how her mechanic found squirrels under the hood? Because she said!
Pretty much everything not witnessed by you should have some sort of attribution. He said; she said; according to records; whatever.
Make sure you have properly attributed everything in your story. Basically, every paragraph after the lede and nut graf should have some sort of attribution affixed to it.
I know that's gonna look a bit weird, having graf after graf with so-and-so said this and this other dude said that and so on. But we do it as journalists to make sure that readers know exactly where we got our information. It promotes transparency and illustrates the factual basis for a story.
Over the next few days, when you're doing your daily newspaper readings please note attribution. See how frequent it is. See how writers offer it. Get a sense of how it's supposed to look in a finished product.
And don't fret too much. This is not uncommon for a young reporter, but something that needs to be fixed, pronto.
Were you there when he had the wiring replaced? No.
Did you pay for the repair bill? No.
So, how do you know?
It's because he said so, right?
So, why not let readers know your sourcing? Brookes said he spent $184 to get his car's wiring replaced?
How do you know Kasparov was driving home one night when her car fritzed out? Because she said! So add "she said" as attribution.
How do you know how her mechanic found squirrels under the hood? Because she said!
Pretty much everything not witnessed by you should have some sort of attribution. He said; she said; according to records; whatever.
Make sure you have properly attributed everything in your story. Basically, every paragraph after the lede and nut graf should have some sort of attribution affixed to it.
I know that's gonna look a bit weird, having graf after graf with so-and-so said this and this other dude said that and so on. But we do it as journalists to make sure that readers know exactly where we got our information. It promotes transparency and illustrates the factual basis for a story.
Over the next few days, when you're doing your daily newspaper readings please note attribution. See how frequent it is. See how writers offer it. Get a sense of how it's supposed to look in a finished product.
And don't fret too much. This is not uncommon for a young reporter, but something that needs to be fixed, pronto.
Squirrels/Missing: Writing With (AP) Style
On first reference, you use a first and last name: John Smith. But what do you do on a second and subsequent references?
Here is AP Style, under names:
In general, use only last names on second reference.
So if you mention John Smith in the first reference, it should be just Smith from that point on.
But what if there is more than one person with the same last name? AP Style has that covered, too. Also under names:
When it is necessary to distinguish between two people who use the same last name, as in married couples or brothers and sisters, use the first and last name.
Also, does punctuation go inside a quote, like this:
"I rule," Omar said.
or outside, like this:
"I rule", Omar said.
It's the former. Punctuation goes inside a quote.
Now, let's talk about titles.
If someone's title precedes their name, then you capitalize: East Lansing Athletic Director Hugh Baker
If someone's title follows their name, then it's lower-case: Hugh Baker, East Lansing athletic director
Also, titles in most cases should not be included after a first reference. You may start out by saying Professor Laura Ruffenboch, but in subsequent references it's just Ruffenboch, minus the professor and Laura.
If you're referring to an organization by formal title, then it's usually caps: the East Lansing School Board
However, on second reference -- once you've established what group you're referring to -- you can use a generic title in lower-case: the school board
And if you break up the title or rearrange the sequence in an informal way, then drop to lower-case: the school board in East Lansing
Moving on, on first reference, is it Sergeant Manuel Cortez, or Sgt. Manuel Cortez?
It's Sgt. I know, because I looked in AP Style, under military titles.
On second reference, is it Sgt. Cortez, or just Cortez?
It's the latter. Under the same:
In subsequent references, do not continue using the title before a name. Use only the last name.
Also, some of you referred to Jason Abare as Jason in second references. Is that okay under AP style rules? No. This is what it says under names:
In general, use last names only on second reference.
Some of you were all over the board in whether to write a number as a digit or a word. 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?
Twenty-two . . .
Actually, that IS correct number use. This is under the numerals heading:
Spell out a numeral at the beginning of a sentence. Now, there are situations where you have a number that would be very awkward to spell out. Like with very large numbers, like 48,384. I would suggest not using such a number at the start of a sentence. Or start such a sentence with attribution so the number conflict doesn't matter (e.g., "According to the U.S. Justice Department, 48,384 . . . ).
Some of you faced a dilemma here with whether to change 3 to 1 to three to one, if used inside of a quote. Here's the general rule of thumb:
If the quote was spoken to you in an oral interview, then it's perfectly okay to change words to adhere to AP style, since it doesn't change what was spoken. If you are quoting a document, then you need to replicate how the document actually readers, whether it conforms with AP Style or not.
In this instance, since you did not know if the quotes were spoken or written, I noted the AP style rule but did not dock you for it.
Now, when the girl was referring to "my Mom," should "mom" be lower-case or upper-case?
It's lower-case. AP Style, under mom:
Uppercase only when the noun substitutes for a name as a term of address: Hi, Mom!
Did anyone think to look under "mom"?
Moving on, was it U.S. Justice Department or U.S. Justice Dept.? Did it depend on whether it was a first reference or a second reference? What does it say in AP Style under department?
Finally, is it Alzheimers disease or Alzheimer's disease? Did anybody look in AP Style under Alzheimer's disease?
I would strongly suggest you review AP Style headings under titles and numerals and names and department. And Alzheimer's disease wouldn't hurt.
Here is AP Style, under names:
In general, use only last names on second reference.
So if you mention John Smith in the first reference, it should be just Smith from that point on.
But what if there is more than one person with the same last name? AP Style has that covered, too. Also under names:
When it is necessary to distinguish between two people who use the same last name, as in married couples or brothers and sisters, use the first and last name.
Also, does punctuation go inside a quote, like this:
"I rule," Omar said.
or outside, like this:
"I rule", Omar said.
It's the former. Punctuation goes inside a quote.
Now, let's talk about titles.
If someone's title precedes their name, then you capitalize: East Lansing Athletic Director Hugh Baker
If someone's title follows their name, then it's lower-case: Hugh Baker, East Lansing athletic director
Also, titles in most cases should not be included after a first reference. You may start out by saying Professor Laura Ruffenboch, but in subsequent references it's just Ruffenboch, minus the professor and Laura.
If you're referring to an organization by formal title, then it's usually caps: the East Lansing School Board
However, on second reference -- once you've established what group you're referring to -- you can use a generic title in lower-case: the school board
And if you break up the title or rearrange the sequence in an informal way, then drop to lower-case: the school board in East Lansing
Moving on, on first reference, is it Sergeant Manuel Cortez, or Sgt. Manuel Cortez?
It's Sgt. I know, because I looked in AP Style, under military titles.
On second reference, is it Sgt. Cortez, or just Cortez?
It's the latter. Under the same:
In subsequent references, do not continue using the title before a name. Use only the last name.
Also, some of you referred to Jason Abare as Jason in second references. Is that okay under AP style rules? No. This is what it says under names:
In general, use last names only on second reference.
Some of you were all over the board in whether to write a number as a digit or a word. 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?
Twenty-two . . .
Actually, that IS correct number use. This is under the numerals heading:
Spell out a numeral at the beginning of a sentence. Now, there are situations where you have a number that would be very awkward to spell out. Like with very large numbers, like 48,384. I would suggest not using such a number at the start of a sentence. Or start such a sentence with attribution so the number conflict doesn't matter (e.g., "According to the U.S. Justice Department, 48,384 . . . ).
Some of you faced a dilemma here with whether to change 3 to 1 to three to one, if used inside of a quote. Here's the general rule of thumb:
If the quote was spoken to you in an oral interview, then it's perfectly okay to change words to adhere to AP style, since it doesn't change what was spoken. If you are quoting a document, then you need to replicate how the document actually readers, whether it conforms with AP Style or not.
In this instance, since you did not know if the quotes were spoken or written, I noted the AP style rule but did not dock you for it.
Now, when the girl was referring to "my Mom," should "mom" be lower-case or upper-case?
It's lower-case. AP Style, under mom:
Uppercase only when the noun substitutes for a name as a term of address: Hi, Mom!
Did anyone think to look under "mom"?
Moving on, was it U.S. Justice Department or U.S. Justice Dept.? Did it depend on whether it was a first reference or a second reference? What does it say in AP Style under department?
Finally, is it Alzheimers disease or Alzheimer's disease? Did anybody look in AP Style under Alzheimer's disease?
I would strongly suggest you review AP Style headings under titles and numerals and names and department. And Alzheimer's disease wouldn't hurt.
Monday, October 1, 2012
Controversial: We Had Some Fatals
Most folks did pretty well in this assignment. Some grafs were too long (some people need to hit the "return" key more often and make shorter grafs) and too many people need to remember to double-space your work so I can fit comments in the margins.
Unfortunately in this exercise, we did have some fact fatals. Three, to be exact.
In one, we wrote a very nice story that had a solid lede and gerat fact organization. But in the nut graf, we said that the board policy permits boys from playing on girls' teams. In fact, the policy prevents such an action.
The incorrect word -- which spell check wouldn't have caught, because it is an unintended word that happens to be spelled correctly -- changes the meaning of the sentence in question, and therefore is a fatal.
In a second case, we referred to the school district as that of Lansing. In fact, it was East Lansing. The two are not the same, and so this also changes the meaning of the story and is a fatal.
In a third case, we misspelled the name of Jane Tribitt as Tribett. Misspelling a name is a fatal.
Now, do fatals suck? Yes, they do. You automatically get a 1.0 on the assignment, no matter how well you did otherwise.
That's so we can emphasize how the root of journalism isn't writing, it's getting it right. There is no such thing as getting a "little" thing wrong, as any error mars our credibility.
The good news is, practice story assignments like this one make up just over one percent of your final grade. And that's by design, so we can build good fact-checking habits into our routines so that when we get to much higher-weight assignments like the out-of-class stories, we've identified our bad habits and worked them out of our systems with the practice stories.
Unfortunately in this exercise, we did have some fact fatals. Three, to be exact.
In one, we wrote a very nice story that had a solid lede and gerat fact organization. But in the nut graf, we said that the board policy permits boys from playing on girls' teams. In fact, the policy prevents such an action.
The incorrect word -- which spell check wouldn't have caught, because it is an unintended word that happens to be spelled correctly -- changes the meaning of the sentence in question, and therefore is a fatal.
In a second case, we referred to the school district as that of Lansing. In fact, it was East Lansing. The two are not the same, and so this also changes the meaning of the story and is a fatal.
In a third case, we misspelled the name of Jane Tribitt as Tribett. Misspelling a name is a fatal.
Now, do fatals suck? Yes, they do. You automatically get a 1.0 on the assignment, no matter how well you did otherwise.
That's so we can emphasize how the root of journalism isn't writing, it's getting it right. There is no such thing as getting a "little" thing wrong, as any error mars our credibility.
The good news is, practice story assignments like this one make up just over one percent of your final grade. And that's by design, so we can build good fact-checking habits into our routines so that when we get to much higher-weight assignments like the out-of-class stories, we've identified our bad habits and worked them out of our systems with the practice stories.
Controversial: A Good Lede/Nut Graf/Body Sequence
Let's take a look at this lede/but graf/body grouping.
The
East Lansing School Board unanimously voted Tuesday night to ban boys
from playing on girls' teams, after concerns were raised that male
athletes could pose a hazard for female players.
The
policy, which will take effect immediately, was implemented after four
boys made the East Lansing High School girls' field hockey team. Many
teams from opposing schools forfeited their games in order to avoid the
possibility of their players being injured by the male athletes.
After receiving complaints in home and away districts, school board member Jane Tribitt decided it was time for a policy change.
"The boys are just too big and physical and it intimidates the girls on the team," Tribitt said. "It is a matter of safety."
Senior
Jacob Stevens, who played on the field hockey team, thinks the policy
is unfair and while he was on the team, none of the girls complained
about his presence, he said.
East
Lansing High School Athletic Director Hugh Baker said he believes the
policy will hurt the school's athletics program, because the school
would have to forfeit games against teams with male players due to
safety concerns.
"It
would be unfair to force our field hockey team to have a losing record
every year because it has to forfeit all those games," Baker said.
East Lansing resident Sandra Adler, who has a daughter on the field hockey team, is in favor of the new policy.
"I just don't think it's healthy mentally or physically to have the boys and girls playing on the same team," Adler said.
First, you have a nice lede that says what happened (boys were banned), when it happened (Tuesday), who did the decision making (the board) and who is going to be affected (boys), and why it was made (safety concerns).
Then the nut graf expands on that: it says exactly when the decision takes effect (immediately), and exactly why it was made (after four boys were on the team, and it forced other schools to forfeit games).
It mines a second layer of supporting info that is helpful for the reader to have to make sense of what happened.
You start with getting a paraphrase from a board member -- a decision-maker on this issue -- on why she voted yes; then you pair it with a related quote.
Then, you get an opposing viewpoint -- that from an affected player -- and pair that with a related quote.
Then, you get the perspective of someone caught in the middle -- the athletic director, who opposes the policy but is responsible for enforcing it -- followed by a related quote.
Then, you wrap it up with an outside but relevant viewpoint; that of a parent of a athlete. And you also pair it with a related quote.
So you have a lede that meets the Peanut Barrel rule; a nut graf that helps expand on the lede and provide a pivot into the greater story; and then information sets in descending order of criticality to the story, each paired with quotes.
What do you think of the job done here?
Controversial: Break Up Those Grafs!
In journalism, we generally try to write in very short paragraphs.
What we try to do is limit a paragraph to one main idea OR one
supporting idea OR one fact to support an idea. Not all of the above.
In general, that means many paragraphs will be just one or two sentences; the exact opposite of English comp writing styles that encourage massive paragraphs.
Let's look at this example of a mega-graf that can easily be cut up:
Now, each unit of thought and each unit of supporting information has its own graf. It's easier for readers to pick out each independent thought or supporting fact. It's easier for editors to identify key points and supporting info, and find where such facts and info are lacking.
Okay, this single graf contains several elements: the first sentence is a quote from one source. The second sentence is a fact that provides evidence to support the quote's position. The third and fourth introduce and allow a quote from a second source. The final sentence offers a new level of detail that helps build upon the quote.
So, you can break this graf up into four separate grafs, like this:
Now, each unit of thought or supporting bit of evidence has its own graf. Now, it's easier for readers to identify each key point, in the same way an outline allows readers to visualize key points in a text-heavy draft. Now, it's easier for editors to identify key points, or the lack thereof.
I know it's gonna look weird, given years and years of bad English comp habits that you've picked up. But this is how we write in journalism. It's a more practical style for writers, editors and readers.
And FYI, if you see on your graded assignments that I wrote an L-shaped symbol at the start of a sentence, that is the copy-editing symbol for starting a new graf.
In general, that means many paragraphs will be just one or two sentences; the exact opposite of English comp writing styles that encourage massive paragraphs.
Let's look at this example of a mega-graf that can easily be cut up:
High
school athletic director Hugh Baker told the board, “If safety is the
issue of concern for the board, then our girls teams would have forfeit
games if there are boys on the opposing teams." Last year alone the team
would have had to forfeit 10 of the 18 games, therefore creating a
losing record every year. Many think its very unfair, including Jacob
Stevens. Stevens, a senior at ELHS said, “I don’t think it is fair. There
are countries in the world where men’s field hockey is a recognized
sport. Not every guy wants to play football, basketball, or baseball."
Stevens was really looking forward to playing on the team his senior
year.
Now, each unit of thought and each unit of supporting information has its own graf. It's easier for readers to pick out each independent thought or supporting fact. It's easier for editors to identify key points and supporting info, and find where such facts and info are lacking.
Okay, this single graf contains several elements: the first sentence is a quote from one source. The second sentence is a fact that provides evidence to support the quote's position. The third and fourth introduce and allow a quote from a second source. The final sentence offers a new level of detail that helps build upon the quote.
So, you can break this graf up into four separate grafs, like this:
High
school athletic director Hugh Baker, told the board, “If safety is the
issue of concern for the board, then our girls teams would have forfeit
games if there are boys on the opposing teams."
Last year alone the team would have had to forfeit 10 of the 18 games, therefore creating a losing record every year.
Many
think its very unfair, including Jacob Stevens. Stevens, a senior at
ELHS said, “I don’t think it is fair. There are countries in the world
where men’s field hockey is a recognized sport. Not every guy wants to
play football, basketball, or baseball."
Stevens was really looking forward to playing on the team his senior year.
Now, each unit of thought or supporting bit of evidence has its own graf. Now, it's easier for readers to identify each key point, in the same way an outline allows readers to visualize key points in a text-heavy draft. Now, it's easier for editors to identify key points, or the lack thereof.
I know it's gonna look weird, given years and years of bad English comp habits that you've picked up. But this is how we write in journalism. It's a more practical style for writers, editors and readers.
And FYI, if you see on your graded assignments that I wrote an L-shaped symbol at the start of a sentence, that is the copy-editing symbol for starting a new graf.
Controversial: Be Efficient With Words
It's important that you look for unnecessary words and strip those out of your work. Like in this lede:
The East Lansing School Board has made a decision on Tuesday to implement a ban to no longer allow boys from competing in girls' sports.
It's a good lede, but wordy. First, do you need to say has made a decision to when just saying decided would suffice?
Second, isn't saying implement a ban and no longer allow the same thing? I'd get rid of one of those, or even both. After all, doesn't ban say all that in just one word? What we have left is this:
The East Lansing School Board decided Tuesday to ban boys from competing in girls' sports.
Is there any difference in meaning or context or detail than the first lede? I'd say not. It's just a lot shorter and less wordy.
The East Lansing School Board has made a decision on Tuesday to implement a ban to no longer allow boys from competing in girls' sports.
It's a good lede, but wordy. First, do you need to say has made a decision to when just saying decided would suffice?
Second, isn't saying implement a ban and no longer allow the same thing? I'd get rid of one of those, or even both. After all, doesn't ban say all that in just one word? What we have left is this:
The East Lansing School Board decided Tuesday to ban boys from competing in girls' sports.
Is there any difference in meaning or context or detail than the first lede? I'd say not. It's just a lot shorter and less wordy.
Controversial: The Satisfying Ending
In one story, you wrote about the vote and the ban and the pros and the cons. Then you ended with this graf:
It is impossible to make both sides of a proposal happy. However, the East Lansing School Board took a progressive leap forward in an attempt to protect their female athletes.
Here's my question: why did you add that? First, readers already know what happened; this simply repeats it. Second, you are adding a bit of opinion here, which we should refrain from doing.
In traditional English comp we write what is called a satisfying ending; that is, a closing statement that wraps everything up. Happily ever after, and so on.
But in journalistic writing we start with the ending in the lede, and then backtrack to let people know how we got to that ending and what facts support it.
That means in many journalistic stories, the ending will seem kind of abrupt. But that's okay. Just let the story end where it ends. Don't essentially repeat the lede by adding a satisfying ending.
It is impossible to make both sides of a proposal happy. However, the East Lansing School Board took a progressive leap forward in an attempt to protect their female athletes.
Here's my question: why did you add that? First, readers already know what happened; this simply repeats it. Second, you are adding a bit of opinion here, which we should refrain from doing.
In traditional English comp we write what is called a satisfying ending; that is, a closing statement that wraps everything up. Happily ever after, and so on.
But in journalistic writing we start with the ending in the lede, and then backtrack to let people know how we got to that ending and what facts support it.
That means in many journalistic stories, the ending will seem kind of abrupt. But that's okay. Just let the story end where it ends. Don't essentially repeat the lede by adding a satisfying ending.
Controversial: How Do You Know ...
... that the athletic director disagreed with the move? Could you read his brain?
No. You know that because he said that.
So, you need to say that the athletic director said he disagreed with the policy.
How do you know the boy field hockey player was disappointed? Did he write you a note?
No. You know because he said that, too.
So you need to say the boy field hockey player said he was disappointed.
No. You know that because he said that.
So, you need to say that the athletic director said he disagreed with the policy.
How do you know the boy field hockey player was disappointed? Did he write you a note?
No. You know because he said that, too.
So you need to say the boy field hockey player said he was disappointed.
Controversial: It's SAID
It's not so-and-so explained. It's so-and-so said.
It's not so-and-so commented. It's so-and-so said.
It's not so-and-so continued. It's so-and-so said.
It's not so-and-so described or told or stated or exclaimed.
It's so-and-so said. No need to find another word saying the same thing.
It's not so-and-so commented. It's so-and-so said.
It's not so-and-so continued. It's so-and-so said.
It's not so-and-so described or told or stated or exclaimed.
It's so-and-so said. No need to find another word saying the same thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)