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. 

A total of 35 words.

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.

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.

22. When interviewing listen for other stories. You can often get one or two page leads from incidental comments.

The biggest problem for local newspapers is actually filling the paper - yes, yes I know that's the bleedin' obvious.

Or so you might think. Local newspapers tend to do everything that possibly can to make this task as hard as possible.

It's not deliberate it's just a complete lack of foresight - which in fairness is easy to do when the sheer trudge of filling the pages is job enough, which is brought about by a lack of foresight, which in turn...

Well you get the idea.

It's all too easy to become focused on filling the pages and panic stricken moving on to the next one - in a rush without looking properly at the material you have.

Which brings us to listening out for stories in interviews.

It should - like for example, reading a newspaper - go without saying that when reading papers you are scouring for stories to use for your own paper.

(Remarkably it seems the effort of ripping something out of a paper is too much even for some national journos. Years ago as a reporter on The Sun a colleague brought in a very good tale about a very pretty woman solider that he had taken from his local. It had also been spotted by a rival news editor - only he was waiting for the news agency to file it...he had a long wait. The interview and pictures were in the bag and printed.)

Ok so, when reading the newspapers or magazines always be on the look out for stories from your patch. You should be able to find one or two in a good week - of course, if you are any good the stories will already have been in your paper.

But the point is always be on the look out for secondary stories in your interviews. For example say a local celebrity during a general interview about their latest book they were bullied while they were a pupil at the local comp...see if it can be developed into: I was bullied at school, says local star. Getting addition quotes from former pupils/teachers.

It is the sort of thing done all the time on the broadsheets...adapt the ideas to suit your own paper.

Or if an editor is against the idea - some of them really are unimaginative - keep the quotes to one side to use at a later date (probably the following week when you will be panicking about filling the pages all over again).

But here's an example of my own about what I mean.

I spotted this interview in The Spectator and even before I'd reached the end I wanted to interview Geoffrey Wellum, the Battle of Britain's youngest pilot...I was genuinely overjoyed when I found out he was from (nearly) my patch (I had to ask politely to do the interview from the reporter whose patch it was).

This is my original interview with him. I never nailed the intro - and actually remain pretty unhappy with the article as a whole...especially when compared to Christian House's Spectator original.

However journalismtips is not a masterclass in feature writing but basic hints for beginners.

Needless to say the article took up a page with photographs. But we couldn't fit everything in. So rather than cramming it I considered what I could leave out.

I decided we could dispense with the details of how his remarkable story came to be discovered and turned into a TV film. The result was this article.

I use this only as an example of how it can be done.

You can also use it for tip-offs which can in turn lead to proper investigations when something is said in an unguarded moment.

5. Always remove unnecessary examples of “that” – you can test if it’s needed by removing it and seeing if a sentence scans

Possibly a controversial one if you read or write the broadsheets which use the word "that" in every other sentence.

Not entirely sure why since it hardly improves the copy neither does it make it more intelligent - no one is impressed by the use of "that".

It is not up there with say osculation in relation to, say, the use of the lips. Not does it have the same pleasingly pompous satisfaction of farrago. Not the simple joy of agog (clearly a word that should get out more).


So unless you've one of the handful of internships on a broadsheet it is probably best to leave out. Without it the copy is faster and cleaner.


Here are some examples where it is unnecessary:


The Home Office argued that he should be detained while officials sought further assurances from Jordan.


While Heathrow said it was confident that it will be able to cope with the next batch of snow...


The family of the 85-year-old founder of the Democratic Unionist party, now officially known as Lord Bannside, confirmed that he was being treated in Ulster hospital on the outskirts of east Belfast.


In each of the cases taken a random and there are thousands of them it is totally unnecessary for the modern reader - and perhaps even less so since many of the "serious" papers have become compacts. In other words space now counts.


But it's not just the broadsheets. Try this from one particularly bad local.


While councillors agreed that the display team is an asset to the town's tourist trade, they said the guild would be treated like any other local organisation that is desperate for cash.


It's a "that" double whammy. And means THREE unnecessary words - without the second "that" you don't need the "is"....and that is from a low rent tabloid.


On one occasion I was able to remove 25 unnecessary "thats" from one feature - a whole paragraph and no facts were lost or meanings changed. It was that simple.