Journalism Tips. 51. Writing stories. Why I think you should take I out.

Sir Humphrey: The identity of the official whose alleged responsibility for this hypothetical oversight has been the subject of recent discussion is not shrouded in quite such impenetrable obscurity as certain previous disclosures may have led you to assume; but not to put too fine a point on it, the individual in question is, it may surprise you to learn, one whom your present interlocutor is in the habit of defining by means of the perpendicular pronoun.

Hacker: I beg your pardon?

Sir Humphrey: It was... I.

So far we've gone through the basics of finding people, using FoIs and the basics of making contacts. More on these subjects in a later posts.

Now we come to the business of actually writing the story.

As a general rule of thumb whenever you are tempted to write anything that is to be read by more than a handful of people go through it removing the word "I" - unless it is in quotation marks and somebody else has said it.

This goes for most news, features and reviews... and an awful lot of comment too.

If you don't believe me (again only to be rarely used) try reading a paper at random...

Pick up the Daily Express and run through its news pages. Or The Mirror... or the Bridlington Post... or the Falmouth Packet... or The Economist... even i won't have news stories with the word I (unless it is about the paper's circulation - but let's draw a veil over this).

Unless you are a fundamental part of the story - and going along to an event does NOT make you a fundamental part of the story it makes you an observer - you should never use it.

Instead what you write should be about other people. It is part of writing as a journalist. It is not to say that gonzo journalism or first hand reporting will never feature in your career it is just at this stage it is best to leave it on the park bench, give it a lolly and tell it you'll be back in five minutes - then not return to that area for at least the next five years.

"I" is what Twitter is for... not readers of your news stories.

Similar when reading student articles interviewing someone vaguely famous there is far too much what a great honour it is for the interviewer to meet them. Why "it's not every day that you get to meet global superstar and singer extraordinaire Frankie Cocoza..." (at this stage I'd like to apologise to readers of this blog from outside of the UK for even introducing the concept of a Frankie Cocoza into your consciousness. Needless to say he is some irritating little no mark who once appeared on the UK version of X Factor).

Ask yourself: Who will be interested in YOUR experience of meeting a celebrity? What will they get out of reading about you? Why would they care?

Again, stop reading stuff online and read a few properly subbed features in a newspaper or magazine. See for yourself how they are done.

The word "I" may feature occasionally but it is not the main focus.

Now before anyone starts let's put aside the writing of the brilliant Liz Jones - yes, I did say brilliant. She had a style which is often mocked but it is incredibly successful - and well read - especially among her target audience. That however takes a lot of experience because that is what she is sharing as part of her hook for readers.

Or take Hunter S Thompson who shoe horned himself into his stroies to create Gonzo journalism. This was not done on the basis of a single interview or evening. He lived and breathed the life of his subjects - or er not in some cases. You simply haven't got the time - yet.

Perhaps more importantly once you remove the "I" from your copy you begin to write differently. It naturally changes your persepective. Your copy-style changes, and quite rapidly, to one more like that of mainstream media.

To break my own rule: I once picked up a college magazine. And every single article featured the vertical pronoun and tucked away behind the reviews and the going out pages and editorials and lengthy articles of Developing World debt were two pages on the forthcoming student elections.

An important subject for most students, one might think? Perhaps an interview to hear the voices of somebody else in the paper? A meaty subject worthy of spending some time over...? Of course not each candidate was given 30 words to say what they would do if they won office.

I consoled myself with the fact the reviewer of James Joyce's Ulysses happened to enjoy it.

Update: A former colleague who has asked to remain anonymous sent me this rather glorious tale that illustrates the above beautifully...

She wrote:

This brings to mind a story told by an old editor of mine after a terrible accident involving a ferry when a number of lives had been lost. He was told at conference by the head of news that one particular junior reporter was at the hospital bedside of a survivor who had given a blow-by-account of the horror. "Great," said my old editor. "Let's clear two pages for a first person piece." Three hours later, when the 1,500-word story was submitted, it read something like this: "I was awoken at 6.30am by a phone call from my news editor. 'Get down to the ferry station', he said, with some urgency in his voice. Immediately I grabbed my notebook and my camera and headed out of the apartment, grabbing a bagel en route." And so it went on and on and on....

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

41. Getting a job in journalism: How to make the most of work experience

Even the smallest of weekly newspapers can get inundated with requests for work experience. It means that in any given year 10 or 20 - perhaps even more on the bigger papers - wannabe reporters are coming through their doors.

Contrary to what you may be thinking (but not always) it is not purely an exercise in free labour. Believe me having dealt with the trail of destruction some trainees can leave behind it is often easier to do without them.

On the most part work experience is given for four reasons:

1. Almost everyone offering it will have done it themselves. It is the tried and tested method and they like to impart some of their own experience to the next generation.

2. It is part of the paper's "community remit". With budgets slashed to nothing it is a way of offering something extra to the people they serve.

3. They are looking for talent. That's right, they can even be looking for bright young journos (such as yourself).

If we are going to be cynical it can also be:

4. They need someone to churn out a dozen nibs, make tea and generally be a dog's body for a week.

Now reasons 1, 2 and 4 are all very laudable. It's No. 3 that we need to concern ourselves with. Bearing in mind a news editor can see so many trainees you will need to stand out from the crowd (let's call them people who haven't read this blog).

Newsrooms are usually much much smaller

So how do you do that? The answer is pretty simple... Make the news/editor's life easier. If you've been following this from the start you will have read tips 1 and 2 (I'm sure you can look them up yourself without need of a link).

If you've read the paper for a few weeks you should have a pretty good idea about what's going on in the local area, the topics they are interested in and gaps that aren't being filled.

The next thing to start doing is finding those stories - and that's before you go in. If you've never been in a real life newsroom before they can be daunting. The chances are you will start on a Monday and finish on a Friday. So far so normal. But unless you are working on a daily or a weekly that comes out at the end of the week you will get a rather disjointed view. 

For a start if the paper comes out on a Wednesday the reporters will be working to deadline. You won't see the process gearing up... it will be geared up. They will be busy trying to find a splash (front page) or chasing around after last minute quotes or trying to make the dang fool of an editor's "great" campaign - thought up over a tea and a biscuit 20 minutes before - become a reality. 

Sure they will try and throw you some stuff and take time out to go through it (if you are lucky) but, on the whole, they simply won't have time. You will certainly not their main priority.

This might be an altogether different story if come day one you walk in with that page 3 story that everyone was looking for two hours before.

If not, sit in a corner and expect to be largely ignored. Until Wednesday, with deadline passed the collective sigh of relief let's everyone relax for five minutes and even get around to asking you your name.

But that's only half the story. You may finish your week, if you are lucky, with experience of a newsroom, a couple of bylines, a notepad filled with squiggles purporting to be 15 words a minute shorthand and little else. 

Your week is up and you never see anyone in that newsroom ever again. That, after all, is what most people do.

Now think about it differently. This is the first stage of getting a job. Perhaps not this week, nor next month, maybe not even next year but you are feeling for an opening.

Firstly, you will know who to speak to when pitching a story. Secondly, you will have a good idea of when the news editor is busy (not a good time) and when it is quieter (a good time) to speak to them. Thirdly, you will have direct contact numbers for the people involved. Finally, they will have an idea of who you are when you are talking to them - and will give you some time.

For every story that makes the news editor will look kindly upon you, shine a little light in your direction, offer you more work experience and at some time in the future will advise you on any jobs that may be coming up ahead of the crowd. And if you are very useful may even give the editor a nod in your direction.

So instead of treating a week's worth of experience as a one off look at it instead as the start of a new and useful relationship with a newsroom.

After all the whole point of being a journalism student is to get a job in the trade. That is unless you really have more money than sense.

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

Journalism Tips 36. How to get a job as a journalist.

Every year thousands of students graduate from some form of journalism or media course. It makes sense therefore that competition for the few jobs available really must be pretty fierce. Or so you would think.

Actually on the whole it's not particularly competitive because most young trainee reporters cannot be bothered - to rise above the herd really doesn't take very much. These odds are shortened by the growth in traineeships on national newspapers - which Hoover (it's a trademark - hence the cap) up most of the cream of that year's journalism graduates.

That is unfair since I have seen some brilliant - well almost - trainees fail to get one of the coveted places despite having an excellent CV and references...but you see where I am going with this.

Clearly you are the smarter than average trainee/student reporter - how do I know? You are reading this.

So what do you need to do? Well an excellent portfolio helps (more of what I mean by this on a later blog). A devotion to work experience helps also (ditto).

It's often said it is not what you know but who you know that makes a difference. When I started in this industry I didn't know any journalists - but I learned what I needed to know and got to know the people who helped me find work.

Within five years I was talking to former Observer reporter John (There are three rules in journalism. First, find a crocodile. Two, poke it in the eye with a stick. Three, stand back and report what happens next.) Sweeney whose original article on the tabloids - it was written in a fun not pious manner - got me interested in journalism.

A few years on (I was pretty slow) I was working with The Sun's brilliant chief reporter John Kay. It was reading his copy that helped shaped my own (it was never as good).

Each and every opportunity gets developed by experience and your knowledge....unless your parents are execs on a newspaper, in which case forget all I've said.

Some people are naturals most are not...if you're not preparation is the key and this is in part what this blog is all about. Going back to one of the earlier posts you will see that I claim most work experience is a pain in the butt for the majority of news editors. But if a good attitude, decent work ethic and a few stories makes the difference.

It helps also if you can bring new skills to the table but get the old ones first. If you are sent out on a story there's no point getting a first class video if you haven't got the names of the people you're interviewing. You'll note the headline is deliberately geared to SEO - we are all learning new skills, as we shall see in another post that too will prove important as your career progresses.

Given the state of much of the competition you should find a job with two/three months. If you are doing work experience and following this blog (and assuming there is a position available) it shouldn't take even that long. If you are getting lots of stories and the news editor is not rewriting all your copy ask him or her if they know of any jobs around - note not necessarily on their paper. It might even be worth asking for feedback at the end of the week (but be wary news editors put in massively long hours and come the end of the working week are more interested in getting out of the newsroom that sitting talking to the workie).

Again follow up good work experience places with more calls offering stories. Being dynamic and useful are welcome attributes. But make sure you are not the cause of more problems - write the story up so it is ready to go.

Being a pain is more likely to guarantee you won't get an opportunity even if you may have an occasional good idea.

For several months I had one caller who would ask in a vague manner if I'd be interested in certain stories when I asked him to send them over he'd tell me he hadn't written but didn't want to waste his time if I wasn't going to be interested... I took his name and didn't take any more of his calls.

Most of what you do will be a waste of your time. But do enough of it and, not only will you improve as a reporter, it will get you noticed. But, but, but it's got to be to at least to a half-decent standard - again this is something that past and future blogs will cover.

But first and foremost read the papers...you'll be surprised how much you can learn.

To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter or sign up below for email updates.

Journalism Tips 35. Why every reporter should know their history.

In order to interview and write intelligently every decent reporter should be able to rely on some residual historical knowledge of their own. While Wikipedia may solve many of the problems while sitting in the office it is very little use while in the middle of an interview.
Similarly if you don't know what to ask Wikipedia for you are never going to find it. For example if there is a dustman's (or as they are know doubt called now a peripatetic disposable environmental logistical transition officer) strike and you know nothing of the Winter of Discontent than you won't be looking for it and more importantly you won't feature it in your story.
Some years ago I spoke to a reader while on a local newspaper and he complained: "The problem is that most local reporters are just thick. The editors are usually alright - but even then sometimes..."
It is not my view. Although given the paper I was working on at the time I could see how he may have reached that conclusion.
As a general rule of thumb I'd say it is worth having a detailed understanding of the recent (five years) events), reasonable background on the past 100 years and a decent amount of knowledge on overall British history.
You see, unlike science - people will expect you to know something about the past. (Scientists are a far more understanding mob than most people and they know the chances are that the day you flunked your GCSE chemistry was the last day you ever looked under a microscope. A little tip when interviewing anyone esp scientists about their work wait for them to finish their explanation before picking up your pen and then asking if they could put it into layman's terms for the readers...you understand the concept, of course, but you feel their words would be so much better. (This usually works until the day that someone responds that they WERE using layman's terms and your general ignorance is revealed)).
So why is history important? The chances are if you are working on locals you will have to cover the usual fare of anniversaries these are usually dull and uninspiring reads generally brought about by a complete lack of interest on the behalf of the reporter to the subject matter. By knowing of the events we can better understand the person's role in them and contextualise it within our story.
Again this is not about having a detailed history - we are still writing a story - but a general over view that stops us looking ignorant. It is a surefire way to lose the respect of the interviewee..alternatively a little knowledge can go a long way.

For a readable overview of British history it's worth reading This Sceptred Isle which romps through the 20th Century...there are also CDs and, no doubt, downloads.

24. When you've finished a story, read it back to ensure it makes sense, has no typos has been spell checked and it scans well.

You would not believe just how impressed a news editor will be at the sight of clean copy - especially if you are on work experience.

Most of us are guilty of getting sloppy when it comes to Mr Copy - we've too much to do and we're physically and mentally tired.

Take this for example:

Right-wing extremists believe ace riots in Britain are 'inevitable,' a new study claims.


I'm sure they do but however much they may enjoy the riots they are more likely to be 'race' riots - that the right-wing extremists are concerned about.

You on the other hand are fresh out of college - wanting to make a name for yourself.

Because you should see work experience as an extended job interview. That's how I got my first job and it's how many others have got theirs.

So the one thing you really don't want to do have a news editor rolling his eyes at your stupid mistakes.

I've gone into this before but it is worth reiterating. Work experience is the editor's obligations to the community at the expense of his/her news editor's time.

One of the things that I noticed while back on the weeklies was that 15/16 year olds were generally better at writing copy than 22/23 year old journalism students.

For a start they listened and took notes when they were being briefed. Secondly they wrote in a plain, unaffected style. They checked for spelling mistakes and typos, they didn't rush it or see themselves as "above" the story put before them.

They never saw the press release as dull or the people or subject matter it was about as uninteresting. They were learning all the time.

In short they were being good journalists. Bit by bit you could trust them with bigger and better pieces.

You are not going to be given a political scandal if you can't get the wedding report right.

Because behind your back people are asking: "Are they any good?" before deciding if they can trust you with anything that might have the whiff of interest about it.

A news editor once complained to me - very probably about err me - that there was not a single story in the paper that didn't need some correction by the time it came to him...and he is only the second pair of (tired) eyes.

So imagine how you will stand out if your copy is clean. Silly mistakes spotted - I mean what idiot would type "right of passage" instead of "rite of passage"? Or refer to a 10,000 seat theatre? Or...well ok, we'll just leave it there.

The fact is we all make mistakes - in some cases they are small and embarrassing. In other cases, such as claims that newspaper reporters deliberately deleted messages from mobile phones in a cynical way to get more stories, they can see hundreds of decent people made unemployed.

A simple re-read of a story before hitting the send button is often enough to spot most of them. In other cases you may have to think about your vindictive conspiracy addled mind and actually check the facts...like ringing up the phone company to see what happens when police officers listen to messages instead of jumping to conclusions because of your pathological hatred of red tops and popularity.

*All mistakes in this article are deliberate and aimed at testing your ability to spot them (naturally).

1. Read a national newspaper at LEAST twice a week – and not just the Guardian or Independent. Try the Mail and Sun as well.

Quite why this has to be stated is beyond me…the fact that it does says a lot about some of the competition (or lack of it) that trainee journalists face. In other words not a lot.

Indeed some have criticised journalismtips for being patronising - oh but I wish it was.

I decided it needed stating after talking to a second year - yes, a second year - journalism student. Having read the first draft of her copy - about a woman celebrating her 100th birthday - I asked her to re-write it into something that resembled newspaper copy.

Five drafts later and I wanted to know what newspaper she read. Her reply was actually more shocking than her copy, "The Guardian" she said with no small amount of pompousness in her voice before adding "...occasionally."

I suggested she might want to broaden her (limited) reading material to include the Daily Mail and The Sun…I may as well have asked her out on a date given the sheer revulsion that spread over her face.

Oddly enough she was unable to fulfill the rest of her week long stint of work experience, which was a relief for all concerned.

What she was doing in a newspaper office was beyond me…more worryingly, what they had been teaching her for the past 18 months was mystifying.

But she was - is - not alone.

So if you want to work in the media (any type of media not just in print) you should be reading national newspapers and not just The Guardian.

To do so is media equivalent of a dietitian only studying the nutritional make-up of muesli and no other foodstuffs on the grounds it is good for you. Yes, it might well be but a mixed diet is healthy and can be fun too.

I say a couple of times a week - I actually mean seven days a week. That's right every day - even at weekends. But, for the sake of form, twice is at least a start.

And please feel free to read the Guardian but make sure you include the Mail and the Sun and the Mirror and the Express and the Times and the Telegraph and the Independent. At £3 a pop you can skip the Financial Times (although it has a very good magazine at the weekend) unless you want to go into financial journalism.

You should be getting a feel for what makes news and the way to do that is by reading an actual newspaper. 

Don't rely on the internet that will only draw you to a few articles you are interested in. So yes, buy the newspaper.