Why Local World's David Montgomery is right and so very wrong

With almost impeccable timing David Montgomery, chairman of Local World the publisher which swooped on the former Northcliffe Group of local and regional newspapers, announced he wanted his papers, or rather its websites, to "harvest content and publish it without human interface."

This, he said could all be achieved within four years. He argued that newspapers “cannot sustain a model from the middle ages, where a single journalist goes out on a single story, comes back and writes it up”.

He is wrong, of course. But not quite so wrong as some of his loudest critics have argued.

For the time being, since you are probably one of the journalists who will be affected by this, let us concentrate on why he is wrong.

Within days of him making his ill-judged comment something happened in a corner of south east London. Drummer Lee Rigby, leaving Woolwich Barracks, was run over in a car by two fanatics who then attempted, at least according to reports, to hack off his head.

Although the initial incident was not captured on film, at least as far as we know, all the subsequent events were. From the attackers' blood soaked preaching, to the angels of Woolwich, to the gunning down of the pair. All were caught on mobile phones, in colour, with sound and from a dizzying array of angles. Hollywood itself would have been proud.

So how did this shocking footage make it onto the television screens and websites bringing the full horror shocking horror of what had happened on a British street into our homes? Well, there is the problem for Mr Montgomery... it was down to the "human interface", the very outdated model he believes is a thing of the past.

It was that human interface which was able to get the footage immediately from the dozens of eyewitnesses standing around - to stop them before they uploaded it to YouTube or put it on Twitter - that gave them the scoop and the huge rewards that go with it.

A lot of that footage and the subsequent interviews were also free.

But, under the brave new Local World, this would not happen - although let's be realistic how many local reporters were at the scene? And even if they were there, for how long? 

Indeed, for many papers fighting ever shrinking circulations and decreasing ad revenues Mr Montgomery's vision is in fact a reality.

So let's not be so fast to lambast the man who is at least saying what he believes in. There are a fair many publishers who are already doing this by stealth. The one man operation already exists in many newsrooms or, indeed, Starbucks.

The ultimate logic for Mr Montgomery is of course the further closure of offices and the  even further moving away from the patch that is already part and parcel of many reporters' working lives. The weekly visit to the patch - especially in wealthier areas where rents are too expensive for a journalist on sub-£20,000 a year salaries to afford - being not unlike that of the parish priest who must tend his flock from afar.

No, the absolute conclusion is that reporters locked in aircraft hanger-sized newsrooms, hundreds of miles from their patch, never going out, never seeing the community they are meant to be working in, is the future.

What happens then is that stories go wrong, subtleties get lost, basic mistakes get made, press releases become news, sometimes those press releases will be countered by opposing press releases or statements. Meshed together they form the basis of a story. That is sometimes, not always.

Sometimes those press releases might even be good.

Those press releases and Twitter and Facebook and YouTube become the non-human interface of 21st Century newsgathering.

But these sources are flawed. Could you, would you, dare trust them on their own? Can - let alone should - journalists even rely on press offices (which themselves are subject to periodic cutbacks)?

However, let us put aside our natural prejudices on this matter and again remember, in too many newsrooms that is already the reality for too many stories.

(Some years ago I wrote a press release for a friend's restaurant. It was written to be cut at five, 12, 20 and a whopping 40 pars. It went to all the local papers and apart from minor changes to the intro went in at five, 12, 20 and 40 pars - even I was surprised by the latter.)

So again, let's not jump down Mr Montgomery's throat for outlining his vision. 

Only like those papers the veteran newspaper man has forgotten a few things. Those papers are all shrinking in circulation.

Because who still buys newspapers? It is readers. People who still read for pleasure and  information. In the rush to emulate The Sun's still sizeable circulation, editors cut the length of stories down to 15 par max "page leads". The art of writing was lost in order to cram even more "news" onto its pages.

And what news it was. Garden fetes, appeals, charity collections, coffee mornings, annual fairs. In fact so much of news that could be found stuck to the lamppost in the average town.

In fact everything except that you - or the casual or first time reader - might actually want to read.

All of this, and a propensity of some of the more baser editors to exaggerate so-so stories with ever ever increasingly hysterical headlines, made real readers disappear in droves, even those who still believed in the importance of community news.

Even more importantly those new readers attracted to the garish, brash, made up stories, were hardly the prime targets for advertisers.

Local papers became dull rags. Something that, to quote one reader: "You always felt that you'd be missing out on something if you didn't buy the paper... you never did."

How long does that go on for?

Now let us put aside our higher notions of what a newspaper actually is. Look at it, as every reporter or editor should now do, for what they really are in the commercial world. Let us, for a minute, be grown up about it and deal with the real world. 

Strip the news - the baubles that entice the readers to pick it up or buy it in the first place - from its pages and what are we left with?

The answer, though we may be loathe to admit it, are the adverts. Those things that pay the wages, that keep the whole operation running.

And when advertisers read a paper that appeals to them and their customers, then they will carry on advertising. That, and not simply insisting upon saying "advertisers and readers" whenever talking of them is the nub of a newspapers long term success.

Occasionally this has been tried. For a short while, there was much talk of using Mosaic to target readers. It didn't work. It didn't work because too many editors had no idea how to change from the formulaic approach they had used for years.

So in areas that were seeing a boom in wealthy younger pensioners, newspapers made little or no effort to capture a potentially lucrative market. They played to core audiences, insisting that hundreds of pictures of children - or worse pictures by children - would sell papers. This on the basis that the mother would by two copies, so would an aunt and a grandmother and so on and so forth...

Of course they wouldn't be doing that the following week, indeed, it would be the turn of the next doting parent. No one else would get a look in. That is, unless they were running a coffee morning.

And in other areas house prices booms saw entire areas change readership profiles. Would you believe it from what you are reading? The content remains stuck appealing to its traditional public sector housing estates readership, the paper itself is cheap, the layout grey or tabloid brash.

Meanwhile, all around them, smart publishers produce glossy magazines, with little or no actual news content but rich in advertising.

Important, real news, is lost forever because, ironically, news is a parasite on advertising and newspaper advertising, of itself, cannot live without the news.

And so let me return to the news "without human interface" and why it is a danger, not, for loss of news, but for long-term advertising. For this symbiotic relationship the advertising need to feed on something and in the brave new online world local papers have only one thing: Local news.

This is the very advantage Local World has. It already has in place its very biggest advantage, the largely trusted brands it bought from Northcliffe.

Pulling away from the medieval model may make sense commercially in the short or even mid-term. But losing - or even downgrading - the paper version now or even four years time does not make sense.

To do so puts the online content on a par with the one-reporter set-up of the local news blog. Set up by those with drive and a vested interest, other than advertising. Look around the country and more and more are springing up.

Too often they fail, not least because one man bands are difficult to sustain. But good writing and investigative reporting attracts new writers, those who want to be associated with a local brand. And that writing and those investigations are improving.

(Again, I know this from experience. As a local newspaper editor at 10 to 20 percent of content came from writers willing to offer their services or content for free. The time saved was reinvested back into the news content of the paper making it more attractive to readers. Poor articles were rejected, somewhat mercilessly to maintain quality.)

Now imagine poor content from a paper with a "non-human interface", written far away from the very people it is meant to be serving. Online does not have the high overheads of the newspaper industry. Any slob with a computer and a will can write (as you are reading). 

How soon before they attract real advertising? Before the directors of small local firms decide they prefer the content of this upstart online media publisher? Before small groups of local writers staff to form together to challenge the big conglomerate, whose local HQ is 60 miles away? Who offer cheaper advertising to cover wages and not profits?

Local newspapers, as they exist, need to change, Mr Montgomery is right. They cannot go on forever as they currently do. We need a change in the way news is gathered. A smarter way to collate the information, sent back to a newsroom (perhaps even hundreds of miles away) is packaged for individual newspapers and web by teams of subs. Not because they know the area but because they know the target audiences of each of the areas. Subs who will know how to use Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and the rest as a secondary and not a primary source. That should remain the place of the reporter.

58. Lessons from the movies: Always be thinking about deadlines

For as long as there is printed media, or radio stations, or television there will always be deadlines.

You could have the best story in the world... but you get it in late and it is worthless. Now this may be an outmoded concept in a few years time.

And indeed it is arguably an already outdated idea for internet news bulletins but for everyone else it is still useful.

There is nothing like the pressure of a deadline to concentrate the mind. The news editor breathing down your neck can - oddly - bring clarity and focus to your work.

No more worrying about the right choice of words for your intros - just get the bloody thing written, broadcast, read.

And do not think that because a final deadline is, say 7pm, that's when you have until to write it. Unless you are writing the splash it's often a lot earlier.

Even on weeklies there has to be a steady flow of copy coming through. Those sub-editors don't come in just to eat their packed lunches.

So if out on a job - especially if you are working for a daily - keep a constant eye on the time. Don't forget to report in - but not too often - when you have a significant line or there has been a major development (apart from any thing else your story could be moved up the list).

If working fresh on a story allow yourself at least 20 minutes before the deadline to write your copy. If you are working on a developing story start writing before you get there.

But that is breaking news.

For the most part that is not the case. It is just filling in the bread and butter stories that is an issue.

Again this is why diaries are often useful. They allow a paper to propel itself into the forthcoming week - even if nothing much is happening on the patch.

Today's clip is from the 1940 classic His Girl Friday...

Cary Grant plays the cynical newspaper editor trying to hold on to his ace reporter - who also happens to be his ex-wife.

Sounds cheesy but under Howard Hawks's direction it is hilarious and fast-paced. And there's some great lines about journalism.

It is based on a 1929 play The Front Page - which was adapted into another movie in 1974... called The Front Page.

Anyway if you are interested you can buy the movie from Amazon - which, you see, is my effort at advertising.

This is the link:

Journalism Tips 50. Working your first patch. Contact building.

Today young reporters are taught all about data journalism - effectively glorified number crunching.

There's nothing wrong in this, in fact it can produce some brilliant investigative stories. It's also not that much fun.

Getting out onto a patch is really one of the best parts of the job. Actually talking to people you would never normally come into contact with makes it interesting.

Building up a relationship with someone so that they take you into their confidence is where - and I'm rather loathe to use the word - scoops happen (or at any rate half decent stories).

Now there is no point simply running around your patch trying to catch everyone and expecting them to tell you easily packaged, off the shelf, exclusives.

Like everything that takes time a fair amount of effort. But it's worth investing the time, especially if you are planning to be on the patch for a few years.

Quite simply having a number of a person does not make them a contact - otherwise we could all walk around with the Yellow Pages and call it our contacts book.

Real contacts need to be cultivated (which sounds slightly cynical but isn't). The contacts that will give you the best stories are those you make an effort with, the ones you speak to regularly.

You have to give them a reason to trust you - and you do that over time. If they see what you are writing and it is well researched, well written and fair - sometimes even if it is not in their best interests - they will begin to trust you.

It really does not take long. But really don't try and score cheap points, or sensationalise or needless stitch a person up over a minor joke (believe me public life is dull enough without trying to make everyone so paranoid they never try humour again).

If you fairly reflect what the person is trying to tell you, they will tell you more. And with trust comes information, better information, more guidance, advice on where to look for that better story... that exclusive which is going to get you a decent page lead in a national.

And it all starts with a simple introduction (and probably, but not always with a pint).

So let's go through this. You should have contacts among:

Local councillors

The police

Tenant and resident associations

A smattering of some of the larger religious groups

Licensed Victuallers Association

Federation of Small Business

Local theatres

Larger businesses

The shopping precinct

Local newspaper

Pressure groups - including friends groups

Sports clubs/leagues

This is only a very basic list but it's a solid start. If you followed the previous tips and started a Twitter feed for your patch you have a basic in.

Anything they tweet about that maybe of interest you have an immediate point of contact. Tweet them and ask for a chat. See if you can develop that moan about funding cuts or local road works killing business into something more. First check it's not been done before... or see how you can take the story on.

Local councils are often the first place. It may not seem it but these are incredibly important sources for your local area, more so than national Government.

This is the organisation that is the frontline when it comes to dealing with national policies. The local councillors are the ones that deal with real people in their surgeries, so they will see how those policies work in the real world. 

Running alongside this is the council's own policies - these too will affect local people. Then there is planning, not necessarily a full council policy, but a policy made from the planning committee.

Too often local papers aren't very good when it comes to dealing with councils. It may be in part that local newspaper reporters are often young and councillors are often middle-aged and old. It is a generalisation but it works as a rule of thumb.

Usually the most helpful councillors are the ones in opposition (funny that). So first off if you are going to contact people on your personal Twitter account I suggest removing any political stance you may have on your profile.

'Lefty' or 'Europhile' or whatever you may have may make people wary of talking to you. Bias will be seen in your copy anyway without you explicitly stating the fact.

Personally over the years I've been told I'm a Tory and a Socialist - even from people reading the same story.

Secondly local government often transcends party politics for the vast majority of its work. Thirdly you should be on the side of your readers (I will deal with this in a later post).

And finally most councillors are doing the job to help their communities and do the job not for money but a sense of duty. 

Now all of this is not to say you can't get on with some particular councillors more than you do others. 

Remember too that more often than not these people live in their areas they serve. By nature of their position they know a great many people, they hear about things both relevant to their work and not.

They are reading through reports, they will know the background to them. A long serving councillor will know what has been tried before... and why it didn't work. In short they can bring alive an otherwise boring planning application, or new road scheme, or parking costs and so on.

In other words lots of stuff you won't necessarily know.

And if they are very good - and media savvy - they will highlight potential areas and advise to stick around or turn up at a particular council meeting.

So yes it is worth attending a few meetings, even as a student. And if the local paper isn't there it may be worth filing a lead and seeing what happens.

But again wherever possible take the story out of the council chamber and into streets. Few things are more boring than a dialogue between half a dozen councillors at a meeting.

What is useful about attending is that you see first hand the councillors with the strongest opinions or those with particular interests. Make a note of them in your contact book - say a councillor interested in the local market it is worth going back to them again next time it comes up in a story.

A good contact book does take time to build up 

Reporting for beginners. 44. Finding people in the real world (part 3).

In the previous posts we looked at what factors to take in with names and use of search engines when trying to trace someone. In this one we are going to look at gathering the information - in the real world.

First off don't ignore the obvious no matter how unlikely it may be. I once tracked down a Duke by calling directory enquiries. It can still happen, although it is increasingly rare.

Again much of this depends on how much time you have and how desperate you are to find someone.

But always keep in mind many of the people you want to track down have good reasons for not wanting to be found. We also live in a very transitory age. People can move not from street to street but county to county.

Again as part of our information gathering we need to look in many different places.

At the scene of an accident look for memorials. People will go there to lay floral tributes and leave messages. Keep in mind my earlier tips regarding death knocks which can be found here and here.

The same basic rules apply. In this case give the person time and only approach when they have begun walking away. Try not to hover too closely, so keep a respectful distance but not so far that you won't be able to catch up with them once they go.

You yourself should read through the messages. Look for any clues, obviously names and nicknames, as we will see in a later post even a first name is worth checking. But keep a note also of relationships ie aunts and uncles and make a note of their details, it may come in handy later when trying to track down family members.

Bear in mind that you can't ask people if they want to talk to you if you can't find them - and they not know or even think about the newspaper being interested in their story.

Check also local businesses and nearby homes as the person may live locally and be known. Keep a note of which properties you've tried and their response - if you need to go back at a later stage it will stop knocking on the same doors.

It is also worth checking with the police although don't rely on this unless you have a very good relationship with them, thesedays there is an almost automatic assumption that the family of the deceased or a person involved in an accident will not want to talk with you and they will refuse to ask on your behalf.

Many will also be fearful that you will get in the way of any subsequent investigation, forgeting that libel and subjudice laws will still apply in the event of any criminal action.

If the person has died speak with the coroner's office. If the inquest has been opened (albeit and adjourned) the details are a matter of public record and should be available to you.

It is also worth checking the local newspaper...even if you work for it. The BMDs (Birth, Marriage, Death or Hatched, Matched and Dispatched as it is also known) column can already have a notice in it.

Knowing the timing of an accident also helps. People generally follow the same patterns returning to a scene at about the same time may help you find someone who was around and may have witnessed it.

But it is not all about trying to find the relatives of people who have died. Journalists are always trying to track people down for all sorts of reasons for good as well as for ill.

The best way to find them is to keep a good contacts book. Having their number in the first place it certainly the quickest and easiest which is why having a good, up-to-date contacts book is worth its weight in gold.

However we can't have everyone's number but we can use what we have. A good relationship with councillors, who because of their role in the community will have their ear to the ground, will help if you know the rough area the person lives in.

Also try chairmen/women of residents and tenants associations. If they do not know ask them for any long term residents who may be living in the area.

Don't be put off if someone says they moved out some years ago. Keep asking for specifics: When did they move? Any idea where they moved to? What was their job? Married, divorced, single? Any known relatives/friends? Where did they live previously? Every scrap of information helps.

If you are after a particular expert try other people in their field or call magazines/websites that deal with their specialism and ask them. They are usually very helpful.

In smaller communities ring anyone whose number you find and ask if they can help. You would be surprised how many are still willing to put you in touch or contact the person on your behalf.

If you believe they have a business try rivals or better still go to the Companies House website and check for directorships.

As always, the more detail you can collect the easier it will be. Constant cross-referencing helps narrow down searches all the time. But, as always, there are no guarantees.

To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter.

Tips for reporters 43. Finding people part 2

As explained in the previous post there really is no great secret to finding people.

In the olden days (that's pre-internet) there were telephone directories and communities; today there is the web and social networking.

However there are still a large number of people who fall in between these categories, although this will slowly fall as more people come of age and the older populations die away.

Of course in the future there will be other issues to deal with, namely the growing emphasis on privacy, which may or may not turn out to be an issue du jour.

But in the meantime let's work with what we have for the time being.

Always remember research is key. The more information you can collect the easier it is.

But let's not forget the obvious. Check electoral rolls, most decent newspapers have access to them nowadays. They range in sophistication with more or less data on them (name, address, public telephone numbers but also data such as ages, marriages, deaths, directorships and county court judgments (ccjs) - ie bankruptcies.

In the UK there is www.192.com which is available to everyone. You get 10 free basic searches a day but you only get limited information. You have to pay for the premium details.

 It does come at a small charge. But even if you don't have access to this or are not inclined to spend your own money it is worth trying it out as it can give certain clues. Having tried it out on myself it was of limited value when free. However cross-referencing the info with a search engine would have given me a starting point for my searches.

Another simple method would be to type out the name of the person I'm searching for and mobile (in the US I guess that would be cell) or contact. It's especially useful when looking for councillors (although they ought to include their details on the council website many don't these days); other public officials or prominent local business people.

A lot are involved in other community projects, ie a local charity auction. Their contact details may well be on press releases put online. Or they may sit on the board of a local institution, a museum for example. In which case type in just their surname and where they are involved because in many cases these places are far more formal and less inclined to use first names.

To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter.

Reporting Hints 42. Finding/Tracing people (part one).

There is an art to tracing people but it is very hit and miss and it can take a lot of time for not very much reward.

However that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Naturally it helps to get all the information you possibly can on the person. It helps too if you are methodical.
So let's start with the basics:

Write down every scrap of information you can as you learn it. Make sure you include the source of that information in case you need to go back and check at a later date.
If you've found it online I suggest keeping the web address somewhere safe, it can save hours of work retracing your steps.

Names.

Not something you can take for granted. First off, you have to worry about spelling. There are, for example, around 14 different spellings of the name Mohammed - which if you think sounds pretty hard to trace wait until you hear there are 18 variations of the name Chantelle (in no particular order: Chantelle, Chantel, Chantal, Shantel, Shantelle, Seantel, Shauntelle, Shontelle, Shontal, Chantalle, Chawntelle, Chauntelle, Chantille, Chantielle, Chantell, Chantele, Chantalle).

Add to the this shortening of names. Jo could be Joanne, Jo-Anne, Josephine, Joan, Jocelyn etc etc.

Of course that is assuming that the name they go by is their first name. They may use a middle name instead of their first name. Surprisingly more common than it sounds (David Law, James McCartney or even William Pitt are some more famous examples - that's Jude, Paul and Brad(ley)).

Then you have street names, pseudonyms or nome de plumes (pen names) (think David Cornwall better known as John Le Carre); stage names (Michael Caine  -  Maurice Micklewhite), nicknames, avatars etc etc. It might even be an initial.

Surnames aren't particularly straight forward either. As well as the above you have to take in names changed by Deed Poll, married names, double barrelled names, and maiden names. Also re-marriages and, as above, misspellings.

Misspellings, even on public documents, are in far more common than you might believe. Keep this is mind especially when dealing with unusual names.

If you can get a middle name(s) it can also be useful in tracking people, especially those with common names. But remember many people drop them or simply don't use them on every document.

Ages

A date of birth is a big help. Remember in the UK it is day, month year unlike the US where it is month, day, year. Failing that it will help to get even a rough description. Are you looking for someone in their 20s or in their 70s? However never forget people are not always as observant as they like to think they are. So don't rely on it entirely. It is not unknown - or rare - for an eyewitness to describe someone as a "young girl in her 20s" when in fact the person you are chasing is actually a woman in their 40s.

Again make sure you keep a note of any scraps of information that come your way. As we shall see later it can come in handy when making connections. And even if it later transpires the information is wrong it means you can cross off avenues you may have otherwise have wasted time on


In the next part we look at where you can start finding names.

To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter.

How to be a journalist 40. The death knock (Part Two)

In my last post I dealt with how reporters should deal with a death knock. As always there is nothing - or at least very much - revelatory for experienced journalists. But then these tips are aimed at juniors and trainees who may yet have covered one. Again this is not an exhaustive list and all comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

This latest posting concentrates on how to build up a picture of a person's life in a few questions. Again every circumstance is different so while this tries to cover everything you will still need to think on your feet and listen to the answers given.

You will also need to be aware of any on-going police action and/or the potential to libel. It will be part of your job to explain why you won't be able to include all their quotes. You could not for example quote a claim that a widow that a driver involved in a death crash was not paying attention. That is up to a coroner/court to decide. If at all possible steer them to something that will make a more general point without being unusable.

All of this said you are still looking for a line. This is not about simply writing a formulaic story along the lines of:

A family last night paid tribute to....

We could/do all write this a hundred times over. Sometimes the tragedy in and of itself is simply enough but keep in mind the family details are not revealed straight away in most cases. It could come an edition or two after the original story.

By then the immediate family will be aware, so too many of the extended family and friends as well, possibly even wider still. Or it has been revealed by a rival news organisation. All of which means that sticking to the formula is no good and why you need another line.

So assuming that you have managed to get a chat with the family and have checked relationships of the people you are talking to and double checked the details given to you what should you be asking:

1. Establish all the immediate family members and their relationships. You need names and ages. Don't assume this is all the family. You will also need to establish length of relationship to a partner. If their parents are still alive, any other family. If they are young you want to know about boyfriends or girlfriends has the family spoken to them? You want to get the general reaction from the family. I try to avoid asking "How do you feel?" and try, "I can't imagine how you feel, how would you describe it?".

2. Can you describe their personality? This isn't all about facts, it's about pure emotion. It covers a great deal of very personal information and what you are trying to do is convey their life in a few words. This is a catch-all question it allows the bereaved to talk in an open-ended manner about the deceased.

3. What were their hobbies/interests? Again this is detail that fleshes out a life. It also, as with many of the questions, can provide fresh avenues to chase. Most of the time this will simply not be necessary but never rule it out entirely. It may be worth asking if there is anyone else they think it is worth talking to.

4. What did they do for a living? And previously? Again this is about establishing the person's existence. Not everyone is defined by their work but some are and - for good or for ill - many people will be able to create an image of that person based on their work. Did they go to university? Previous employment etc. It's a sad but usually true that if the deceased is young, public school educated and went to Oxford or Cambridge the story is more likely to be picked up by nationals. For older men (born before 1945) it's worth considering if they conscripted into National Service. For children you will want to be establishing the school and favourite subjects.

5. Were there ever any worries about the situation in which they died? Does the family think they will take any action - legal/civil - in regards to the death? For example, a cyclist may have always been concerned about the particular junction in which the accident happened and had voiced those fears. Or perhaps they had had several near misses over the years or been involved in a non-fatal accident not so long ago.

6. Were they from the area the family home is in? Essentially this is about establishing their deep background. They may have moved there for work, or an immigrant looking for a better life, or to study or any other of thousands of other reasons. If so how long had they lived there for? Or they may simply have lived there all their lives. In the case of children why did their parents move there.

7. What were their hopes and dreams? This is about showing 'a life interrupted' a life that could have been if it had not been struck by tragedy. This is particularly poignant of younger lives that have yet to reach full potential. If not married consider asking if marriage plans had been discussed.

8. Have they ever previously appeared in the news before? We're back to catch all questions but remember the person you are interviewing has been through a great shock. Without knowing anything about the deceased you have to cover as much ground as you can in as few questions as possible.

9. Can I have a photo? Preferably one with the family and ideally one of them looking smart.

10. And finally. Is there anything I have missed that was important to their life that you would like to get across? Personally I also add if they would mind me calling again and always ask for a mobile number. This is where explaining that if you can check back the details with them can be useful.

I think I have covered most of the important elements, as always, I may have missed something crucial and would appreciate any comments adding to this list.

To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter.

How to be a journalist 39. The death knock (Part One)

Without doubt one of the hardest, most emotionally draining jobs for the average reporter is the death knock. It is not, as many critics of the Press will have you believe, a simple act of voyeurism into grief. If you believe that you are in the wrong job - many do and many leave.
And if you find it is not emotionally draining than you ought to see someone about it. I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't feel that way.

The fact is we do an awful lot of these and you never quite get used to them. Not once. So why do we do them? A successful death knock will stop a death becoming just another statistic. It's much harder for those in authority to dismiss numbers than it is to ignore individuals. Bland excuses can be made, figures fudged, the truth bent, things swept under the carpet. Try doing that with a real person - an individual who has experienced pain.

It can also act as an obituary, sometimes but not always, something the family will want to hold on to as a keepsake.

And in the meantime, you as a reporter, will be accused of all manner of despicable behaviour. You will, for your efforts, be accused of intrusion, of being scum, of being a vulture, of preying on grief, of only being interested in selling papers, of being uncaring, of being these and many, many more things.

Which is why you have to believe in what you are doing, in why you believe their story could make a difference. Not only for the family, in the short and medium term, but for others in the long run. And it can make a difference. And, no, I do not believe I am self-deluding. I genuinely believe - as you should - that as reporters what we do is important and can make a difference. Of course I am not saying it will prevent all future deaths of a similar nature; but in some cases it may help highlight and focus energy on a particular area, ie a rat run, a cycling accident at a junction, an industrial accident, a murder.

Also don't go making assumptions, that too is a very bad idea. Being sensitive is essential. Firstly, in order to show you are a member of the human race but also to win over a family's confidence.

Despite all of this we are still there to tell a person's story. If the door is slammed in your face you have failed. I say this because, hard as it is, you should do the knock. Simply not bothering or relying on social media is a disgrace to yourself and your trade.

So hopefully I've established why they are necessary. Many may well disagree, that is their prerogative.

DON'T:
1. Make assumptions. Each death should be treated purely on its own merits.
2. Ever say, 'I know how it must feel'. Unless you can back that statement up by talking about the death of one of your own loved ones and feel it may help in making a connection. In general avoid meaningless platitudes.
3. Rely entirely on social media UNLESS there is no other possible way of doing it. Even then ask to speak to family members in person or by phone.
4. Lack confidence. Yes, it is a nerve wracking experience for the reporter but a polite, professional manner is better than a stammering bunch of nerves, which will only make you sound shifty and not inspire confidence that you will be able to tell the family's story in a way they would want. Indeed a bad approach can and will engender distrust.
5. Be scruffy. Again, you are knocking on a door unannounced, this is about showing you are a professional.
6. Go mob handed to a doorstep. If several newspaper reporters, agency reporters, photographers, camera crews and radio journalists turn up at once send two trusted representatives who can then share the information. There is nothing like an undignified scrabble to upset the family. But trust in your fellow reporters is key.
7. Rush. If a family is good enough to talk to you give them the time they need to tell their story. If you have a deadline looming do explain you have to file but be prepared to stay longer.
8. Ever offer money for someone's story.

DO:
1. Apologise for disturbing them. This is your acknowledgment that you are an outsider at an intensely personal time but avoids the impersonal platitudes (I'm sorry for your loss etc) which the family may well find odd coming from a total stranger.
2. Follow the family's wishes. But if they ask you to go away do remember to ask if it would be possible to come back at some later stage. Ask when that would be convenient.
3. Check everything you've been told by the authorities. Including the spellings of the deceased's name and age. Police and coroners can make mistakes. If this is for print then errors cannot be easily rectified. That in itself can be very upsetting. Indeed even if a family say no to an interview it is still worth asking if you can double check the details.
4. Work out what you are going to say beforehand. It will allow you to make the key points as to why you believe their story is important and will, hopefully, reduce your nervousness.
5. Establish you are speaking to an adult and, where possible, their relationship to the deceased.
6. Remember a person did not become important the moment they died. They were important to their friends and family in life. Build up a picture of that life as best you can.
7. Ask for a photograph that best sums up their life. Preferably with their family.
8. Consider asking the family would they like to be read out any tribute piece. This is controversial in newspapers so check with your newsdesk and it's certainly not something that is advisable in every circumstance but I've rarely - if ever - found it to be a problem. A brief run through ensures there are no misunderstandings; that the details are correct; that you or the family have not left out something that is important; and it helps build up trust with the family. (You must explain it may be edited before going in the paper.)

NEXT: Building up a picture of someone's life on a death knock.

For further reading see Jackie Newton excellent blog here on death knocks.

And here's the Press Gazette report on her research. (I see that many of the negative comments have been removed.)

And here's a personal and view from Australian journalist Sarah Harris on why they are important.

And here's Roy Greenslade offering another view - note he didn't speak to the newspaper he was referring to in the story.

And another Roy Greenslade piece an extract fromThe phone hacking scandal: journalism on trial is by Jackie Newton and Sallyanne Duncan.

To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter.

Journalism Tips 34. Reporters out on the road: The essential kit.

On a previous tip I said you only need two things to do this job a pen and a piece of paper. Strictly speaking that is true but in order to make life a little easier you will need a few more things...as I've remembered having been put back on the road, albeit temporarily.

You see the problem is it is all a bit more complicated - and expensive. So let's take as a given the basics, pen and a piece of paper (nearly enough for most local newspapers but not entirely). What else then? A mobile phone - and don't expect the paper to pay for it. You will need one even on the most backwater of locals. Newsdesks will expect to get in touch with you at any time and the mobile phone is your electronic tag....but they are unlikely to provide it.

I worked at one paper where one of the reporters refused to give their mobiles to the newsdesk because they didn't want to be bothered. I believe they are now doing PR for a cats' home or something equally important. Don't even think it.

The fact is that despite the fact they expect you to have one most newspaper groups will refuse to cover your contract. They will - and should - cover your work calls but don't be entirely surprised if they don't.

The big change came in around the early 1990s, when mobiles then the preserve of national newspaper reporters started to be used more and more by the more ambitious local journos. By 2000 every reporter had one.

I also advise you get a smart phone...failing that you will need a lot of other stuff to lug around.

Namely:

A Sat Nav. In ye olden days when the A to Z was king I used to turn up to jobs hot, sweaty and late because of appalling sense of direction. But the advent of the Sat Nav changed all that. Today I turn up hot and sweaty but, crucially, on time. It's saved a lot of leg work. Of course even the Sat Nav has had its day and you will find maps on most decent mobiles.

A camera. I've spoken too about the need for a camera, photographers being short on the ground thesedays. The importance of photographs has risen dramatically as we slowly migrate to online. An Internet story without a photo is pretty much a dead story. Being able to send pix from the scene - and the faster the better - is a hugely useful for the online team. Many phones also do video...even better. Of course the quality doesn't have to be tip top - this is about supplementing photographers not replacing them.

A lap top - WITH Internet access. Filing from the scene, especially if you work on a daily is essential. You simply can't rely on being able to get back to the office. And if it's a big on-going story then you shouldn't do. But it will probably need a dongle (or whatever they call them in the US) and that will cost. However a smart phone should be adequate to file, although certainly not perfect. 

A dictaphone.  Pretty useful it is too, especially when you discover that your shorthand isn't 100wpm after standing outside in -10º for five hours or when you are in the middle of a riot, it's actually less obtrusive, more or less hidden in the palm of your hand. But also when door knocking it's useful. Writing things down in front of people can make them nervous, they will become more aware of what they are saying and you will lose eye contact every few seconds to jot down what they are saying. Again most phones have them built in thesedays so it's all rather surprising that court security staff don't take them off you when you go in...unlike the dictaphone because you are not allowed to tape court proceedings.

Now if you are relying on all this stuff you will also need a spare battery...unless you have an Apple in which case you will need FIVE spare batteries. Actually you won't because Apple don't have replaceable batteries. So in that case you will need - and believe me you WILL need - an external charger. Speaking of chargers if you are driving it may be worth investing in a dual cigarette lighter socket so that you can charge two devices at the same time.

When on the nationals I used to take two mobiles and spare sim cards just to be on the safe side. The loss of a mobile is a major headache and is not appreciated by the desk...so what if you were mugged, no one cares. 

Indeed on the nationals you need a whole heap of extra stuff you probably won't need on locals or regionals. An overnight bag with at least a week's worth of clothes, although even that may not be enough. One reporter - whose I fortunately cannot remember - once complained: "I've been turning my underpants inside out so many times they look like a humbug..."

You also need your passport on you at all times. I carried mine for two years without ever going abroad until I was sent to Dubai and only just made the flight...it would have been a fairly major downer to have missed it.

But all reporters need to have enough cash - as in real notes - to get the teas in. A cashpoint isn't always available but (again on nationals you will probably need a working credit card). Also a small sack of change (unless you are in London or Cornwall) in which case a large sack of change for parking. Never underestimate just how much you will need...it will never ever be enough.

A radio is useful too. Oh and a book...for the really long jobs (mine was usually the Good Pub Guide but McNae's Essential Law is probably a much more useful item).

Other assorted items that are handy to have around. A stout pair of boots, wellingtons, a large coat, sun tan lotion, expenses forms and an umbrella.

And naturally I have forgotten something. We always do...

I did: It's also worth having an electrical extension lead and additional sockets (trust me you will need them one day).

Anything else?

29. Pen – paper. Paper – pen. You only need two things to do this job. Always carry spares (esp when covering court).

(Press For Time: Bike not required)

If you strip away everything else - the local newspaper reporter only needs two things. A pen and a pad. That's all.

(Although you walk into a newspaper office without a mobile phone - which naturally they won't pay you for - and you won't be staying very long.)

So it always surprises me the number of trainee journalists who walk into a newspaper office without either.

It shows a distinct lack of preparedness by the reporter. No, you shouldn't have to pay for your equipment but at the same time if you are doing an NCTJ course or a degree in journalism you would hope you would be carrying these things around with you at all times anyway.

It's what makes you look like a potential journalist and not the GCSE student considering journalism as a possible career.

Having said that pen - paper. Paper - pen.

(Tommy Cooper: The joke only works with a jar AND spoon)

It's amazing how difficult it is to bring these two elements together. But it shouldn't be.

Carry spare pens with you at all times (although I have been in court and seen three pens fail on me during a case...I should have brought a fourth).

And always have a pen and paper ready when you call or get a call from news desk - you don't want to sound unprofessional rummaging around.

It is the most basic lesson you can learn as a professional journalist - because if you are not recording it,  what are you doing?

27. Carry a camera with you, even if it's just on your mobile and remember to take pix. Photographers can't be everywhere.

Sadly, as I've stated before on this blog, local newspaper photographers are an increasingly rare breed.

Given the fact newspapers rely on content - namely words and pictures - to fill in the gaps between the adverts you would have hoped that photographers would have been kept on.

Naturally that is asking a little too much - which is a shame because a really good photographer can make all the difference. So too can a really bad one.

I once watched a photographer at an awards ceremony half lift up his camera a dozen times and never take a shot.

When the proceedings were over he shouted: "All together now." Like sheep they all got together for the great group shot. That evening he took a single picture.

The following day I was sent it in all its blurred glory - looking like a slightly hazy portrait of the Adamms Family...only without the charm.

(We never used that photographer again under my editorship.)

At the same time we lost a great asset to the paper - one whose art and dedication made a difference to the pages.

Indeed I've seen and worked with many photographers on local newspaper I would gladly work with again.

But bit by bit we are losing them. This, in part, is due to the increasingly cheap technology becoming available. That, and the fact there is no need for a dark room any more.

(Reporters have never been trusted with dangerous chemicals - a fact that remains true today but is largely confined to the showbiz circuit. *feeble joke*)

Digital technology has certainly made it a lot  easier for any slob to pick up a camera and point it in the direction of an object or person who, in turn, is usually pointing at something themselves.

(This in part, but certainly not entirely, is why local papers believe they can do away with photographers - some are so bad or lazy that managers thought anyone could do what they do...the same, it must be said, of a lot of reporters.)

So the point: If you are a reporter carry a camera with you. The bigger, the better really. It helps too if you learn how to use it.

You never know what's going to happen and with locals to usually one - although quite often no - photographers it is essential you learn the skill.

I am a rotten photographer. I have no "eye"....or for that matter no steady hand either.

As can be demonstrated from one of my own efforts when a photographer was unavailable one Saturday morning.

The man in the picture was the Dean of Truro Cathedral, who had been the subject of a church investigation when he was accused of having an affair.

He denied any wrong doing and was allowed back to work. (Although than put on gardening leave). However despite being cleared rumours persisted that was indeed now living with the woman.

He was, and this shaky shot taken on a Canon D500 (I won't go into lenses it's too tedious but it was pretty basic) was proof enough to go to the church authorities.

The picture was used about the size here in the paper I was working for at the time. It got a slightly bigger show in the Daily Mail.

This is a rather extreme example but think because in theory we are always heading towards the story...or we are if we are doing our job right.

And with mobiles now packing half-decent cameras it's worth remembering to take them out if you are first at the scene.

A crap picture is better than no picture.

18. Always dress smartly, you don’t know where you may have to go. Looking like a slob is bad for you and the newspaper.

Information, Broadcasting and Labour Permanent Secretary Amos Malupenga has warned Journalists in the country that they risked being barred from covering functions at State House and any other state function if they continue with their ‘improper’ dressing.

The visibly annoyed Mr. Malupenga was shocked to see some Journalists from named private media houses dressed in dirty jeans, hanging shirt and wearing canvas when they covered President Michael Sata at State House yesterday.

Mr. Malupenga threatened that media personnel who fail to dress properly will would not be allowed to cover the Head of State.

Mr. Malupenga said at a meeting with all media heads at Cabinet Office it was resolved that Journalists covering State functions should be smartly dressed at all times.

ZANIS reports that the Permanent Secretary was addressing Journalists at State House in Lusaka yesterday.

“I had a meeting with your bosses at Cabinet Office and we resolved that action shall be taken with immediate effect on Journalists who opted not to dress smartly and don’t cry foul because we expect you media people to look presentable by dressing in proper attire.

“Don’t accuse us of putting blocks to frustrate your work,” Mr. Malupenga said.

(From Zambian Watchdog)

As a reporter you will rarely know where you are going or who you are meeting from one day to the next. This doesn't apply to everyone who works on papers - some know they will be sitting in the office churning out press releases until their P45 arrives on their desk.

(But since you, dear reader, are checking out jornalismtips let us assume you hope to do rather better than that.)

In an ideal world you will (for chaps at least) wear a suit - but in this age of austerity (as indeed it has been especially for new weekly newspaper reporters in the past 20 years) not always affordable. But you will at least need one for special occasions - such as covering funerals, Remembrance Sunday, royal visits and the like....oh yes and for going to your next interview with another newspaper.

But a smart dress code is essential. At the very least - and it is worth noting what the rest of the news reporters are wearing - smart trousers and a shirt and tie are essential.

Remember you are meeting the public and while you may not agree with a tie the person you are interviewing might. They will look and be judging you and appearance is a part of that.

Plus if you are going to knock on the door of a stranger do you really think jeans and a t-shirt would encourage people to invite you in?

People will take you more seriously if you are smart - particularly (but by no means exclusively) the elderly, and especially that which went through National Service.

More importantly though it is simply polite and professional. Looking like a slob will only confirm some people's already dim view of our occupation.

And on a local you are fighting to be taken seriously. While I agree journalism is more about intelligent questioning and writing every element is important - perhaps some more than others but important nonetheless.

So in a way I can sympathise with Amos Malupenga's view point...but that is a whole different story.