56. Making money from journalism. Finding news stories you can sell.

In this and over the next few posts we will be going into detail about selling news stories.

Any idiot can give away content for free (and if you are struggling to do even that than perhaps you should reconsider your career options).

But why should you be doing it? The immediate answer is obvious: The cash.

That, however, isn't the only or most important reason (it is highly unlikely you will be paying off your university fees - more likely a couple of takeaways).

Getting into the habit of selling stories concentrates the mind more than any classroom exercise. You will be on the look out for news stories in your day to day life.

You will start to see what makes a story and what doesn't. You will be competing against journalists in the real world... and have to deal with the public in the real world.

And after that you'll have to put up with seeing your byline robbed and a 50/50 chance you won't get the money... or at least have to spend an age chasing it up.

So a few generalisations:

1. Local newspapers and websites rarely pay for stories - even front page ones.

2. Tabloids pay better than broadsheets.

3. Sundays usually pay more than dailies.

4. Human interest sells better than hard news - celebrity exclusives pay best of all.

5. Bad news tends to sell better than good news.

6. Stories about middle-class young people do better than stories about working-class old people.

7. Good new photographs will help sell a story.

8. Exclusives can pay more than selling all around - but you will only get paid on publication.

9. Prepare to be ripped off time and again (and not just by the nasty papers - who are actually more likely to pay).

10. Being first helps but until you gain trust it might not always be enough.

And remember above all else - the most important byline is the one on the top of the cheque, as the (old) adage goes.

First off if you intend to sell a story to a national or a magazine or an agency do not merely pass yourself off as a student journalist. While strictly speaking it may be true it's also dishonest.

People may be more inclined to help a student rather than a professional reporter - and, understandably, they may get mightily pissed off if they discover you've been flogging off their story and soon as you've left them.

It's a greyer area if you run it in your student publication and then sell it on because than it is in the public domain.

Secondly don't go around telling people you work for the publication you WANT to sell it to. News editors take a very dim view of this -  not least because it will be they who will be dealing with any mess you leave.

And anyway these days they have enough problems dealing with complaints (mostly imagined or exaggerated) about their own reporters without having to deal with wannabes claiming to be on their staff.

(Oh yes, that too is dishonest.)

When in doubt try: Freelance reporter, which more or less covers everything.

Now stories come from anywhere - and there are no hard and fast rules. Previous posts in this blog have given you pointers on where to find general news.

But essentially what makes a story can be anything. Your college is a good place to start (ie a college netball team playing in a foreign town hit by a hurricane would probably make a story that people would pay for - especially with photos).

If you are a journalism student and assigned a patch listen out for the unusual - a celeb moving into the local area (be careful about this as estate agents have been known to conjure up these stories at times when an expensive property in their area isn't selling).

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.

31. Sensationalism is rarely sensational, esp in local newspapers. You might get away with it once or twice but not forever.

The trouble most people have with papers like The Sun and formerly the News of the World can be encapsulated in one word: "sensationalism". That and the fact they are read by the working classes...dreadful bunch of people.

The chattering classes can ignore tabloids with a dismissive wave of the hand without ever really looking into them, naturally.

And contrary to what some former tabloid hacks will tell you I never had to make anything up (actually that's a lie I did work for ahem the Sunday Sport - I was young, I was naive, I needed the money, that's usually the excuse...actually I needed the money - and I confess that it is not true that Kangaroos played a football match or Sir Trevor McDonald's face was seen on the White Cliffs of Dover).

But oddly enough, even here I didn't need to make much up. Indeed I learned a lot in how to investigate real - if not particularly edifying - stories on shoestring budgets.

How to track down a Blind Date contestant using their first name, approximate area and clues such as: "I work in a bakery where we make all kinds of bread, if you were a loaf what kind would it be?"

(In my defence here it was the biggest show on television at the time. And I was told to find a story on it once a week. I did. Every week. In the face of the bigger tabloids.)

However the same techniques I learned there - that got me genuine stories - I applied to more productive use years later. Tracing people with few clues and not much of a budget.

The good tabloids do produce sensationalism, if you will, but that is the result of bloody hard work and months of it. And it is only very occasionally wrong. Even the best reporters can make mistakes.

On the whole though I saw a lot of investigation go into stories.

Now compare it to this story. On the face of it the front page headline is correct: Bridport: Pickpockets target market day crowds - enough to scare the wits out of any pensioner.

All well and good until you get to the quotes from anyone in authority who say they have no knowledge of such a crime even taking place. Actually it gets even worse...the purse was found and handed in to the police. Indeed one might wonder why this honesty isn't trumpeted and the answer is lazy journalism and sensationalist reporting. 

Quite frankly it looks ridiculous to almost everyone or just scares naive and gullible local people for no due reason. 

A personal theory is that because local people know their area they will soon know what is and is not true. So while you can get away with such headlines once in a while the cumulative effect is ever diminishing returns. Sales jump up year on year because the news has become so much more racy but like the boy that cried wolf people soon stop paying attention to them in locals.

For once you know someone who is connected to the exaggerated circumstances distrust, like damp in walls, creeps in. Bit by bit the foundations of a local newspaper are undermined and will crumble.

It doesn't help that people will accuse you of sensationalism if they don't like the story as happened in this particular case.

So when tempted to write over blowing the circumstances, taking that top spin a little too hard, just remember you will be caught out. And it won't look good.