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 it was down to the "human interface", the very outdated model he believes is a thing of the past.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.
Showing posts with label copy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label copy. Show all posts
Tuesday, 28 May 2013
Monday, 19 November 2012
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.
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.
9. Prepare to be ripped off time and again (and not just by the nasty papers - who are actually more likely to pay).
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.
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.
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).
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).
Thursday, 15 November 2012
55. How to sell stories and photographs to newspapers and magazines.
There has never been so much need for journalism... and so little desire to pay for it.
But there is a lot to admire in the Samuel Johnson school: "No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money."
There are, of course, plenty of blockheads. And to be fair you do need the experience to be a journalist - not a blockhead.
But let's face we are not writing for charity... and even if you are writing for charity, you'd like to get paid, right?
The prospect of actually earning money for what we write is what makes us professional journalists... unlike amateur or citizen journalists.
(Which strictly speaking isn't correct if you are British. We are subjects - but I think the idea of having subject journalists would only confuse matters - so let's stick with citizen.)
So to the point. Can you make money in this game while studying?
The simple answer is: Yes, you can. And should you be doing it? Yes, you should. And will you make a fortune doing it? Er, no.
If you've read these posts from the beginning - read lots of different papers, read the local newspaper, make contacts etc etc - and future ones this is what it is all about.
That is unless you have private means and want to be a journalist as a hobby - then please skip a few posts, there is nothing to see here.
For the rest of you this is what you do.
First off a question: What is the media? This isn't some bullshit philosophical question.
The correct answer is: Information, written/filmed/recorded/photographed and packaged for certain target audiences.
They generally fall into four categories: Geography, socio-economic, consumer or interest.
It is the wonder of our pluralistic media that everyone - or, at least, nearly everyone - is catered for. (Alas Hermit Monthly folded on account of the distribution costs.)
What does all this mean? Simply put having the right information (story) to yourself (exclusively) and packaging it (writing) to the right target (media organisation) means you may - just may - get paid for it (there are never any guarantees).
Note, no one is asking for your opinion (that probably isn't worth anything - at least not yet).
For now the basics:
1. Get a story: They come from all over the place - check the rest of this blog on how to do this.
2. Make sure it has not already been written: Go on the internet and search the mainstream media. Not just the paper you want to sell to but all of them.
3. Write the story: Unless you are already an established freelance you are highly unlikely to be paid on spec for an idea or concept. Otherwise known as "being put on an order".
4. Double check everything: Make sure your story is watertight. Muck it up now and you could be wasting a lot of people's time - not a good thing for them... or you.
5. Get a friend to read it: (Optional) Find someone who is willing to pull your work apart. Listen to their questions. If they can find holes in your work - you can be sure so will a professional news editor.
6. Try to get a package together: If there are photos/words to be had, make sure you've got them.
7. Think where you are going to place it: Decide where this particular story would best fit (this will change from story to story) and, importantly, who will pay.
8. Pitch: Generally speaking a cold call should go to a news/picture desk. If you live in the provinces find out who the area man is, especially if you are planning to make a go of this and continue to produce future stories.
9. Get the timing right: There is little point trying to sell something (unless it is huge and immediate) after news conference.
10. Hope and learn: If you've got a surefire winner you will probably know straight away. Don't get disheartened if it is rejected...
Future posts will go into more detail on some of these. In the meantime if you think you have a story drop me a line: journalismtips@hotmail.co.uk - if I can I'll make suggestions for UK papers.
Good luck.
Haven't got enough of journalism tips? Then "like" my Facebook page for updates and extras... https://www.facebook.com/JournalismTips
But there is a lot to admire in the Samuel Johnson school: "No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money."
There are, of course, plenty of blockheads. And to be fair you do need the experience to be a journalist - not a blockhead.
The prospect of actually earning money for what we write is what makes us professional journalists... unlike amateur or citizen journalists.
(Which strictly speaking isn't correct if you are British. We are subjects - but I think the idea of having subject journalists would only confuse matters - so let's stick with citizen.)
So to the point. Can you make money in this game while studying?
The simple answer is: Yes, you can. And should you be doing it? Yes, you should. And will you make a fortune doing it? Er, no.
If you've read these posts from the beginning - read lots of different papers, read the local newspaper, make contacts etc etc - and future ones this is what it is all about.
That is unless you have private means and want to be a journalist as a hobby - then please skip a few posts, there is nothing to see here.
For the rest of you this is what you do.
First off a question: What is the media? This isn't some bullshit philosophical question.
The correct answer is: Information, written/filmed/recorded/photographed and packaged for certain target audiences.
They generally fall into four categories: Geography, socio-economic, consumer or interest.
It is the wonder of our pluralistic media that everyone - or, at least, nearly everyone - is catered for. (Alas Hermit Monthly folded on account of the distribution costs.)
What does all this mean? Simply put having the right information (story) to yourself (exclusively) and packaging it (writing) to the right target (media organisation) means you may - just may - get paid for it (there are never any guarantees).
Note, no one is asking for your opinion (that probably isn't worth anything - at least not yet).
For now the basics:
1. Get a story: They come from all over the place - check the rest of this blog on how to do this.
2. Make sure it has not already been written: Go on the internet and search the mainstream media. Not just the paper you want to sell to but all of them.
3. Write the story: Unless you are already an established freelance you are highly unlikely to be paid on spec for an idea or concept. Otherwise known as "being put on an order".
4. Double check everything: Make sure your story is watertight. Muck it up now and you could be wasting a lot of people's time - not a good thing for them... or you.
5. Get a friend to read it: (Optional) Find someone who is willing to pull your work apart. Listen to their questions. If they can find holes in your work - you can be sure so will a professional news editor.
6. Try to get a package together: If there are photos/words to be had, make sure you've got them.
7. Think where you are going to place it: Decide where this particular story would best fit (this will change from story to story) and, importantly, who will pay.
8. Pitch: Generally speaking a cold call should go to a news/picture desk. If you live in the provinces find out who the area man is, especially if you are planning to make a go of this and continue to produce future stories.
9. Get the timing right: There is little point trying to sell something (unless it is huge and immediate) after news conference.
10. Hope and learn: If you've got a surefire winner you will probably know straight away. Don't get disheartened if it is rejected...
Future posts will go into more detail on some of these. In the meantime if you think you have a story drop me a line: journalismtips@hotmail.co.uk - if I can I'll make suggestions for UK papers.
Good luck.
Haven't got enough of journalism tips? Then "like" my Facebook page for updates and extras... https://www.facebook.com/JournalismTips
Wednesday, 7 November 2012
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.
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.
Tuesday, 9 October 2012
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tuesday, 11 September 2012
Journalism Tips 38. How to get a job in journalism: Intros
There are two types of intro: The straight and the dropped. This deals with the former.
Some years ago the Daily Telegraph would boast about the length of its intros - 80-90-100 words plus were, if an exception, not uncommon. Particularly, if memory serves, in its cricket coverage. The writing was, of course, beautifully crafted by professionals at the top of their game... They could get away with it, you cannot.
Like many of the "rules" on the blog this is not hard and fast but a guideline - the problem is not that you occasionally break it but that you break it often.
So if your intros are regularly hitting 30-40 words you are doing something wrong. This really isn't a matter for debate. You are writing for a newspaper not a specialist manual.
Being direct does not mean dumbing down. Nor does it mean - heaven for fend - tabloid. It means being to the point. If it makes you feel any better remember you are part of the Twitter generation (well most of you).
It means that your average reader will be used to 140 character long sentences - including the spaces. That's around 22-24 word mark (I know, I've checked my own Twitter personal account - Anthony_Bonnici if you're interested - and several others, from both tabloid and broadsheet writers - to see how they compare).
So now 25 doesn't seem so bad, does it?
Here's a random example:
Channel 4 has cited concerns over security as the reason for cancelling a planned screening at its headquarters this week of a documentary film questioning the origins of Islam. (29 words)
Guardian
Channel 4 has cited security concerns as the reason for cancelling a planned screening at its headquarters this week of a documentary questioning Islam's origins. (25 words)
Or this from Associated Press (The Americans are masters of the verbose intro as they cram in too much information and reveal very little):
SEATTLE (AP) — Raffaele Sollecito, whose budding love affair with American exchange student Amanda Knox helped land him in an Italian prison for four years, maintains the couple's innocence in a new book but acknowledges that their sometimes bizarre behavior after her roommate's killing gave police reason for suspicion.
So let's look at the facts here:
1. The name: Raffaele Sollecito
2. He was on the verge of a love affair with
3. Girlfriend's name: Amanda Knox
4. She was an American
5. And an exchange student
6. He was jailed
7. For four years
8. But continues to claim his innocence
9. In a new book
10. He admits their bizarre behaviour was suspicious
11. Amanda Knox's roommate was killed
The problem here is the reporter has not made up his mind what the important facts. And so rather than leaving something out he has put it all in — and that's why the sentence is 46 words long.
Why does it matter? Getting into the habit of tighter sentences is a useful lesson to learn, for a start. Now most "broadsheets" no longer are — they've taken the compact form. Editorial space, especially with ever squeezed budgets, is at a premium.
People's attention spans are certainly not what they were. Think I'm talking about dumbing down... try a copy of The Times, say, 100 years ago... 50 years ago... Hell! Even 20 years ago.
Here's a random article found on the Internet:
No mention of the latest deaths and not a hashtag in sightAs you can see, quite painful. Some might even say it's the future.
Let's put aside the general style and look at the second par.
The coroner for South-West Lancashire opened the inquest on the bodies of those who were killed, but, after taking formal evidence of identification in the case of nine, he adjourned the inquiry until next week.
Who else was he going to open the inquest for? And for all this we don't know the name of the South-West Lancashire coroner or, indeed, any details of the actual victims of this terrible railway accident.
Someone was clearly being paid by the word (actually they probably were).
Incidentally, seeing as we were talking about intros, this is what the Twitter generation would see:
Yesterday two more victims of the terrible railway accident which occurred on Tuesday evening at Ditton Junction, on the London and North-We
My own efforts for Twitter are this:
Two more people found in the wreckage of the Ditton Junction railway disaster died of their injuries yesterday taking the death toll to 15.
or with hashtags
Two more people caught in the #Ditton Junction #railway disaster wreckage died from their injuries yesterday bringing the death toll to 15.The coroner for South-West Lancashire opened the inquest on the bodies of those who were killed...
I'm sure people could do better.
To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter.
The point is lengthy sentences do not necessarily mean serious journalism. It can mean lazy flabby writing.
Ignore all these points if you are being paid by the word.
Sunday, 1 July 2012
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.
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.
I did: It's also worth having an electrical extension lead and additional sockets (trust me you will need them one day).
Anything else?
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.
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?
Monday, 7 May 2012
33. Always remember on a local newspaper someone will know when you’ve written crap. A bad reputation is not a good thing.
Really this is a continuation of my earlier post about sensationalism in the local Press.
I suppose the argument goes that since sales are in decline the way to reverse it is by aping the big beasts of Fleet Street. Of course the editors that go down this route don't then insist upon having the stories to back it up.
Instead they think exaggeration, the use of hyperbole and unnecessary drama is the key. In short they bullshit.
As I wrote recently, this is an appalling avenue to go down.
When I first took over a local paper I went to various bodies that I thought might be worth talking to. This included the local golf club (see a later point).
I asked to speak to the club secretary. He was only too pleased to meet me, so that he could laugh in my face. He then asked me to repeat what I had said to his assistant - he, quite spontaneously, laughed too, which sent the club secretary into gales of mirth yet again.
There was clearly a problem with the paper...as I hadn't even started.
The problem for too many local newspapers is that their staff are (usually) young. Not surprising given the wages. As a result many (though by no means all) leave to either enter the world of PR or head to bigger newspapers...many more quit altogether. A few (and by no means always the best) will get promotion and head up the management route.
Of course the problem with having so many young staff, especially if they are from outside the patch, is that they will make fundamental mistakes. They will not know the history of the area or the long running feuds, they will fail to understand the significance of an event or be unclear as to the impact of a decision.
And with the staff numbers being squeezed there is not enough time to learn. It is one of the reasons I advocate fewer stories written well.
Because simple mistakes - made too often - undermine the product.
So the junior reporter - along with everyone else - should remember that although they may be only a small cog in the paper's production, they may have a far longer term impact on its future.
And while you may only be passing through the jobs of others now and the future may be affected by simple actions. The loss of an advertiser and a few readers may not be the end of the newspaper (although I bet the advertiser is these days) but the cumulative effect may be.
To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter.
Instead they think exaggeration, the use of hyperbole and unnecessary drama is the key. In short they bullshit.
As I wrote recently, this is an appalling avenue to go down.
When I first took over a local paper I went to various bodies that I thought might be worth talking to. This included the local golf club (see a later point).
I asked to speak to the club secretary. He was only too pleased to meet me, so that he could laugh in my face. He then asked me to repeat what I had said to his assistant - he, quite spontaneously, laughed too, which sent the club secretary into gales of mirth yet again.
There was clearly a problem with the paper...as I hadn't even started.
The problem for too many local newspapers is that their staff are (usually) young. Not surprising given the wages. As a result many (though by no means all) leave to either enter the world of PR or head to bigger newspapers...many more quit altogether. A few (and by no means always the best) will get promotion and head up the management route.
Of course the problem with having so many young staff, especially if they are from outside the patch, is that they will make fundamental mistakes. They will not know the history of the area or the long running feuds, they will fail to understand the significance of an event or be unclear as to the impact of a decision.
And with the staff numbers being squeezed there is not enough time to learn. It is one of the reasons I advocate fewer stories written well.
Because simple mistakes - made too often - undermine the product.
So the junior reporter - along with everyone else - should remember that although they may be only a small cog in the paper's production, they may have a far longer term impact on its future.
And while you may only be passing through the jobs of others now and the future may be affected by simple actions. The loss of an advertiser and a few readers may not be the end of the newspaper (although I bet the advertiser is these days) but the cumulative effect may be.
To keep up to date with future tips follow @journalismtips on Twitter.
Tuesday, 27 March 2012
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.
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.
Tuesday, 20 March 2012
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.
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?
Monday, 19 March 2012
28. Look for stories while at college, write it and tell the local paper. You never know if there's a job coming up there.
As a student journalist you should be writing news or taking photographs for the college newspaper/website/radio (obviously not taking photos for the radio station - that would be pointless).
Please note that I said news. Not reviews, not musings, not comment, not a column, not analysis, not poetry, not critiques, not op eds — just news. Let me be more specific local news.
Hard though you may find this to take no one is interested in your views on the unfolding crisis on Syria as you saw it two weeks ago but finally got round to writing it between lectures.
Neither are they going to read your 2,000 word piece on the plight of women in the Gobi Desert - even the friends who say they have, haven't.
(Press Gang: It's sort of relevant)
It's all very well wanting to be a Guardian journalist — but all you will learn by writing such articles is why the Guardian isn't very well read and how to haemorrhage readers...just like the Guardian.
(By the way unless you are reading this from Oxbridge they probably aren't going to be too interested in having you anyway - it's all rather patrician is our Guardian.)
You will learn nothing about journalism or being a journalist and will bore the pants off of any editor when they try to read your oh-so-worthy cuttings. Actually they won't even look at them and anyway the point of this blog is to steer you towards a job without much need for an interview.
And trust me it works. I know.
Like countless journalists my career began in the student newspaper. If anything it was a wheeze thought up by a friend to get us out of any real work experience (odd since three of us went and remain in the media - probably a far higher ratio than any who did it properly).
Since none of us had a clue about newspapers we went charging into it. Our first big story was that sabbatical officers had all been taking huge loans from the Student Union off the back of their wages - so large in fact that they wouldn't have been able to pay them back out of their remaining pay.
Thus fulfilling the first rule of student journalism (the paper was paid for by a Union grant) - bite the hand that feeds you.
The fact it I had a source, we dug through files, we asked questions - if only we'd known it we had stumbled across investigative journalism.
The story made the front page of the local paper - and yup, I was hooked. Journalism was simple, fun and I enjoyed it. I've spent the next 20 years trying to maintain that...it hasn't always been easy.
But what does this all mean? The first step is that your student newspaper/website/radio is your first step to understanding journalism - you can make all your mistakes (hopefully not too many legal ones) and not too many people will care. More importantly you can learn the tricks of the trade.
Want to be a political reporter? Attend student council meetings. Get to know the student union, find out what's happening with the block grant.
Want to do investigations do general news and make contacts - they will soon start telling you things you can devote more time too.
And as for those worthy pieces?
I can assure you an article about Student Union bar price increases for next year will be read a 1,000 times more than a piece on the West's Imperialistic ambitions in a post-dictatorship Middle East. Honestly if I wanted to read that I'd pick up the Economist and read it by someone who has been there and interviewed the leading players not some spotty oik with pretensions of being an armchair John Snow.
This is not to stamp on people's ambitions. But to give a good grounding in the basics.
Please note that I said news. Not reviews, not musings, not comment, not a column, not analysis, not poetry, not critiques, not op eds — just news. Let me be more specific local news.
Hard though you may find this to take no one is interested in your views on the unfolding crisis on Syria as you saw it two weeks ago but finally got round to writing it between lectures.
Neither are they going to read your 2,000 word piece on the plight of women in the Gobi Desert - even the friends who say they have, haven't.
It's all very well wanting to be a Guardian journalist — but all you will learn by writing such articles is why the Guardian isn't very well read and how to haemorrhage readers...just like the Guardian.
(By the way unless you are reading this from Oxbridge they probably aren't going to be too interested in having you anyway - it's all rather patrician is our Guardian.)
You will learn nothing about journalism or being a journalist and will bore the pants off of any editor when they try to read your oh-so-worthy cuttings. Actually they won't even look at them and anyway the point of this blog is to steer you towards a job without much need for an interview.
And trust me it works. I know.
Like countless journalists my career began in the student newspaper. If anything it was a wheeze thought up by a friend to get us out of any real work experience (odd since three of us went and remain in the media - probably a far higher ratio than any who did it properly).
Since none of us had a clue about newspapers we went charging into it. Our first big story was that sabbatical officers had all been taking huge loans from the Student Union off the back of their wages - so large in fact that they wouldn't have been able to pay them back out of their remaining pay.
Thus fulfilling the first rule of student journalism (the paper was paid for by a Union grant) - bite the hand that feeds you.
The fact it I had a source, we dug through files, we asked questions - if only we'd known it we had stumbled across investigative journalism.
The story made the front page of the local paper - and yup, I was hooked. Journalism was simple, fun and I enjoyed it. I've spent the next 20 years trying to maintain that...it hasn't always been easy.
But what does this all mean? The first step is that your student newspaper/website/radio is your first step to understanding journalism - you can make all your mistakes (hopefully not too many legal ones) and not too many people will care. More importantly you can learn the tricks of the trade.
Want to be a political reporter? Attend student council meetings. Get to know the student union, find out what's happening with the block grant.
Want to do investigations do general news and make contacts - they will soon start telling you things you can devote more time too.
And as for those worthy pieces?
I can assure you an article about Student Union bar price increases for next year will be read a 1,000 times more than a piece on the West's Imperialistic ambitions in a post-dictatorship Middle East. Honestly if I wanted to read that I'd pick up the Economist and read it by someone who has been there and interviewed the leading players not some spotty oik with pretensions of being an armchair John Snow.
This is not to stamp on people's ambitions. But to give a good grounding in the basics.
Thursday, 15 March 2012
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.
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.
Wednesday, 14 March 2012
26. Avoid putting banalities in your stories (ie a budget is a budget not a “pot of cash”). They make copy look amateurish.
When I started editing a local newspaper I wanted to make a few changes - actually, I wanted to change everything.
Which isn't quite as bold as it sounds. The paper once a thriving weekly in a beautiful market town was losing ten per cent of its sales year-on-year.
If you are not prepared for change you are part of the problem.
It occurred to me that one of the issues was we were not writing for readers. Which isn't quite as daft as it sounds. People who read newspapers still read. They don't flit from article to article reading the first few...hey! come back here, thank-you....pars.
So they want something that will inform and entertain them.
What they don't want is a collection of cliches and hackneyed phrases clumped together in a 350 word page lead - tied to together with some quotes from a local councillor.
I was trying to explain this to the worst offender, a junior reporter, who "agreed" with everything I said and then did her own thing again and again....and again and again and again....
And again...and again...and again and again (ok that's enough of that).
A big part of the problem is the language we use. Sometimes you get the impression local newspaper editors hate words (see left - quite why it can't have even a few paragraphs on the front is beyond me.
Especially when even the "downmarket" Daily Star manages to fit a few precious words on the front of its pages.)
But back to my point I was left with a problem. The copy was moribund at best but what could I tell her? They weren't cliches exactly. I explained the problem to a friend, a retired English professor, giving some examples: "Ah! he said" (he was dramatic that way) "you mean banalities."
And indeed they are. Council spending comes out of budgets - it is a perfectly acceptable and understandable word. They do not have "pots of money" like some old grandmother who keeps her savings in a jar. It's a bloody budget. Two examples of how stories sound amateurish:
COUNCILS in Dorset have warned there is not enough money in the pot to repair the county’s damaged roads.
And the second:
But while the district council insists the cost of the ‘jolly’ was allocated in the budget, the authority claims there is no money left in the pot to spend on toilets.
Actually the second example simply doesn't need the "left in the pot" at all - it doesn't add anything except banality.
It's not even being used as a pun.
As always it's not difficult to find examples when you start looking. Take this
Homes in Havering boss Sheila Belgrave has been suspended from office – but the borough’s top brass are refusing to say why!
Simply dreadful on so many different levels.
The "borough's top brass"? I mean really? What's wrong with "her managers"? or "housing chiefs" or "councillors" or "senior officers" or "the local authority".
The trouble with using banalities like this is that you are removing any gravitas from the story. This is potentially a rather serious matter but the use of "top brass" and that exclamation mark bring it down to the language of the Beano (a future blog will deal with the usage of exclamation marks).
There have been plenty of other examples all pet hates of friends and former colleagues - many of whom are respected national newspaper journalists.
What about "slammed" as in "Councillors last night slammed protesters.."? It's not so much that it should never ever be used but use it and them sparingly.
Another is "floral tributes" or "flowers" or "bouquets" or wreathes" as they are more commonly known to everyone outside of local newspapers.
I'm sure you have other examples. Please feel free to get in touch because I'd like top include them. Thanks.
Which isn't quite as bold as it sounds. The paper once a thriving weekly in a beautiful market town was losing ten per cent of its sales year-on-year.
If you are not prepared for change you are part of the problem.
It occurred to me that one of the issues was we were not writing for readers. Which isn't quite as daft as it sounds. People who read newspapers still read. They don't flit from article to article reading the first few...hey! come back here, thank-you....pars.
So they want something that will inform and entertain them.
What they don't want is a collection of cliches and hackneyed phrases clumped together in a 350 word page lead - tied to together with some quotes from a local councillor.
And again...and again...and again and again (ok that's enough of that).
A big part of the problem is the language we use. Sometimes you get the impression local newspaper editors hate words (see left - quite why it can't have even a few paragraphs on the front is beyond me.
But back to my point I was left with a problem. The copy was moribund at best but what could I tell her? They weren't cliches exactly. I explained the problem to a friend, a retired English professor, giving some examples: "Ah! he said" (he was dramatic that way) "you mean banalities."
And indeed they are. Council spending comes out of budgets - it is a perfectly acceptable and understandable word. They do not have "pots of money" like some old grandmother who keeps her savings in a jar. It's a bloody budget. Two examples of how stories sound amateurish:
COUNCILS in Dorset have warned there is not enough money in the pot to repair the county’s damaged roads.
And the second:
But while the district council insists the cost of the ‘jolly’ was allocated in the budget, the authority claims there is no money left in the pot to spend on toilets.
Actually the second example simply doesn't need the "left in the pot" at all - it doesn't add anything except banality.
It's not even being used as a pun.
As always it's not difficult to find examples when you start looking. Take this
Homes in Havering boss Sheila Belgrave has been suspended from office – but the borough’s top brass are refusing to say why!
Simply dreadful on so many different levels.
The "borough's top brass"? I mean really? What's wrong with "her managers"? or "housing chiefs" or "councillors" or "senior officers" or "the local authority".
The trouble with using banalities like this is that you are removing any gravitas from the story. This is potentially a rather serious matter but the use of "top brass" and that exclamation mark bring it down to the language of the Beano (a future blog will deal with the usage of exclamation marks).
There have been plenty of other examples all pet hates of friends and former colleagues - many of whom are respected national newspaper journalists.
What about "slammed" as in "Councillors last night slammed protesters.."? It's not so much that it should never ever be used but use it and them sparingly.
Another is "floral tributes" or "flowers" or "bouquets" or wreathes" as they are more commonly known to everyone outside of local newspapers.
I'm sure you have other examples. Please feel free to get in touch because I'd like top include them. Thanks.
Monday, 12 March 2012
25. If in doubt ASK. But don’t over do it. If you want to know if a word is hyphened look in a dictionary or online.
As journalists we are expected to ask questions — sometimes even pretty dumb ones..
(My favourite is to wait for an expert to finish some particularly complicated explanation before adding: "Yes, I get it. But how would you explain that to the layman?" Often mumbling something about wanting it in their own words. However the stupid question is often necessary to extract the raw emotion of the situation. You may see the emotions etched on the faces of, say, a family who has lost a loved one but still need to ask how they are feeling to get the quote.)
No, dumb questions are sometimes required.
Except in the office. And certainly not from the workie who wants to become a journalist.
So keep your questions to a minimum (except the best ones such as: "Would you like tea or coffee?").
A personal favourite was told to me by a friend. A secretary was escorting a potential trainee out of the office when he asked if the paper he had just been interviewed for was a daily or a weekly.
(He didn't get the job...but he's probably now editing something on the web.)
Write everything you are told down, few things rile people more than having to keep telling a student journalist the same thing over and over again.
Remember you have a huge dictionary, atlas, encyclopaedia, gazetteer sitting on your desk - and hopefully you will have been able to switch it on - all by yourself. (Actually it is amazing the number of workies who can't...instead they sit there waiting for the news editor to crawl on their knees to get to the on button - once you've established it's your desk for the week please feel free to switch the bloody thing on.)
So don't go asking how do you spell something like onomatopoeia - check it quietly to yourself online (like I've just had to - having missed the fourth "o"). Actually, if ever tempted to use the word onomatopoeia, don't.
Also don't use the word psephologists (which I can spell and which I did once) it's flash and an unnecessary technical term...I'll let you look it up.
Certainly don't ask things like is the local MP Conservative or Labour - especially if doing work experience in, say, the U.S., Australia or Scotland.
Just be careful not show off your ignorance. If you can possibly avoid it. Here's another from an agency news editor: "I had to tell a new junior who Belinda Carlisle was the other day."
Don't ask. Just nod, make sure you get the name right and then check it online as soon as you can.
You should also pick your time to ask questions. When you see everyone getting stressed, staring intently at screens and barking down the phone with a little bit more intensity than they were four hours before is NOT a time to start asking dumb questions...
Btw if anyone can put this clip onto YouTube I'd be able to upload it onto here. Thanks.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-WQEVJ7b7nhbbYt/the_paper_1994_racing_towards_deadline/
Oh and if you find this useful - please RT.
(My favourite is to wait for an expert to finish some particularly complicated explanation before adding: "Yes, I get it. But how would you explain that to the layman?" Often mumbling something about wanting it in their own words. However the stupid question is often necessary to extract the raw emotion of the situation. You may see the emotions etched on the faces of, say, a family who has lost a loved one but still need to ask how they are feeling to get the quote.)
No, dumb questions are sometimes required.
Except in the office. And certainly not from the workie who wants to become a journalist.
So keep your questions to a minimum (except the best ones such as: "Would you like tea or coffee?").
A personal favourite was told to me by a friend. A secretary was escorting a potential trainee out of the office when he asked if the paper he had just been interviewed for was a daily or a weekly.
(He didn't get the job...but he's probably now editing something on the web.)
Write everything you are told down, few things rile people more than having to keep telling a student journalist the same thing over and over again.
Remember you have a huge dictionary, atlas, encyclopaedia, gazetteer sitting on your desk - and hopefully you will have been able to switch it on - all by yourself. (Actually it is amazing the number of workies who can't...instead they sit there waiting for the news editor to crawl on their knees to get to the on button - once you've established it's your desk for the week please feel free to switch the bloody thing on.)
So don't go asking how do you spell something like onomatopoeia - check it quietly to yourself online (like I've just had to - having missed the fourth "o"). Actually, if ever tempted to use the word onomatopoeia, don't.
Also don't use the word psephologists (which I can spell and which I did once) it's flash and an unnecessary technical term...I'll let you look it up.
Certainly don't ask things like is the local MP Conservative or Labour - especially if doing work experience in, say, the U.S., Australia or Scotland.
Just be careful not show off your ignorance. If you can possibly avoid it. Here's another from an agency news editor: "I had to tell a new junior who Belinda Carlisle was the other day."
Don't ask. Just nod, make sure you get the name right and then check it online as soon as you can.
You should also pick your time to ask questions. When you see everyone getting stressed, staring intently at screens and barking down the phone with a little bit more intensity than they were four hours before is NOT a time to start asking dumb questions...
Btw if anyone can put this clip onto YouTube I'd be able to upload it onto here. Thanks.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-WQEVJ7b7nhbbYt/the_paper_1994_racing_towards_deadline/
Oh and if you find this useful - please RT.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)