Bad Grammar Happens to Everyone

If you've ever read your own published words and discovered gut-gurgling grammar and/or spelling errors, here's my advice: chin up; resolve to do better; be more careful and take heart:

Grammar goofs: Even the pros make mistakes
By Denise C. Baron
Don’t expect perfection when flipping through The New York Times or Wall Street Journal

“A new wave of start-ups are cashing in on the next stage of the Internet.”

What’s wrong with that sentence? Worse, what’s discouraging about it?

Or this one:

"A forum of employees then work together to make desire a reality."

What’s wrong is the disagreement, in the first example, between singular subject “wave” and plural verb “are cashing in,” and in the second, between "forum" and "work." What’s discouraging is that the first sentence appeared in Newsweek, while the second came courtesy of The Wall Street Journal.

I used to consider The Wall Street Journal a paragon for writing excellence. I held Newsweek and The New York Times right up there, too.

I have to admit my dismay when I happened upon this in a recent Times restaurant review: “None require reservations.” You may argue that the noun none can sometimes take a plural verb, but not in this case. Requires was the required verb.

I wish I could say these instances were exceptions, but grammatical errors and typos of all sorts are easier than ever to spot in the publications many of us rely on to maintain high editorial standards. And that’s too bad, because readers assume the editors are getting it right. If the editors are not, then is it a matter of oversight, ignorance or downright sloppiness? Or has the publishing industry's perceived need for eagle-eyed proofreaders and copy editors—let alone flawless text—been downsized along with its staffing?

Those of us in the communications field will forgive the odd mistake, but that usually will depend on the source. For instance, we might dismiss the use of its’ if it appeared in, say, an ad for a plumbing service. Place that same grammatical goof in a brochure promoting writing seminars, and you’ve got to question how reliable those seminars will be. If a professional communicator’s organization can’t be bothered to mind the language, then who can?

A colleague of mine, bemoaning the declining state of grammar and punctuation among our peers, declared that “the price of admission (to be a professional communicator) is knowing how to write well.” In other words, she said, if you don’t fully grasp the fundamentals of spelling and grammar, you have no business in the business. That may seem like a harsh statement, but it's one that’s hard to refute. Those are the skills all of us should have mastered in school and brought with us to the work place.

Because of the daily demands placed on communicators and the extent of their audience—whether it be internal communications or external, the job is no place for basic training. After all, would you hire a landscaper who couldn’t distinguish an exotic plant from a common weed? Probably not. There’s an expectation that comes with billing oneself as a professional; the pro is expected to know the difference.

Even so, mistakes happen—even to the most seasoned pro. But there are simple measures you can take to help keep them at a minimum, if not eliminate them completely.

Walk away from it. Take a break from your writing. Set your draft aside for a spell, then come back to it with fresh eyes. That extra time between your final edit and submitting the piece for publication can save time in the long run—especially when you pick up errors that previously eluded you.

Send it to a peer for preview. This is the ol' "second pair of eyes" trick that you've heard a gazillion times, and which is particularly useful when your "fresh eyes" aren't so fresh anymore. You've heard it a gazillion times, because it works, by golly. And you'll be surprised by what that new set of eyes can notice.

Give it one more go. Review it again. Slowly. Carefully. Check for noun/verb agreement, use of adjectives vs. adverbs, spelling of names and places, punctuation, style and everything else in-between.

Then take a deep breath, let 'er rip and hope for the best. The very best.

Everything we publish sets an example, and our readers are paying attention. They’re expecting us—relying on us—to apply the language correctly. And they're expecting the very best. We mustn’t let them down.

Leads (and a little bit about false news)

Here are the the leads I chosen for the good/bad lead examples:

Effective Lead

Sleep does not come easy for Hajar Hamzah, who lives at the corner of Perdana Rd 6/7 and 6/12 in Pandan Glades Garden, Ampang, where the land is slowly sinking.

Reasons:

1. It captured the woman's worries well.

2. Provided a human angle instead of starting the story with a direct lead - "A piece of land in Ampang is slowly sinking."

The original story's here. (Note: I have changed certain Malay words to English in the example above.)

Ineffective Lead

The rain failed to dampen the spirits of the crowd at the sixth and final installment of The Star's People's Voice - You've Got the Power Carnival that was held last Saturday at Country Heights, Kajang.

Reasons:

1. Too cliche to start with weather.

2. Lead doesn't tell much about the event, apart from the fact that it rained.

3. Too much information squeezed into the lead, e.g. sixth and final installment & the lengthy name of the carnival. Suggest to bring in some of the details later.

Extra

(I wasn't sure if it was an effective or ineffective lead.)

The country's first astrophysicist will soon become Earth's first official point-of-contact with aliens if they come a-calling.

This lead is simple and direct, and I am sure that the readers want to read further to find out more. But, do they want to read on just because the topic (aliens) is unusual and interesting? I would assume that if the writer had chosen another lead, the story would generate as much interest from the readers.

The original story's here. Some of you laughed when it was read out in the class by Jeremy. :) However, I have to clarify that this news was proven to be a hoax. The Sunday Times of Britain ran the news claiming that the astrophysicist, Othman, would be appointed by the UN to take on the aforementioned role, and the story was instantly picked up by media worldwide. But UN dismissed the appointment as "nonsense" later.

I went to The Sunday Times website, but it's only available by subscription. So I googled "aliens site:thesundaytimes.co.uk" and there was only one result:

"The UN is set to appoint a Malaysian astrophysicist to act as Earth's first contact for any aliens that come a-knocking."

(Yes, I noticed the similarity between come a-knocking and come a-calling :) )

I was also wondering: did The Sunday Times carry the clarification (or another article to prove that the appointment is NOT a rumor)? However, there wasn't any other results from the search.

Anyway, I found The Sunday Times article on an Australian website and I love its lead. It's catchy and it drew the readers in.

When aliens arrive on Earth, they will no longer have to worry about who will greet time.

Reading on, I wanted to to find out what prompted The Sunday Times to report that UN has appointed the Malaysian astrophysicist as the "alien ambassador". But there was no official source or quote. The article only said that Othman was to "describe her potential new role at a scientific conference", and would tell delegates that "UN must be ready to co-ordinate humanity's response to any 'first contact'".

It was also reported that The Sunday Times had obtained a recording of Othman's recent talk, in which she said, "... When we do, we should have in place a co-ordinated response that takes into account all the sensitivities related to the subject. The UN is a ready-made mechanism for such co-ordination."

I am really curious about what The Sunday Times will (or will not) do as follow-up. I will blog about it should I chance upon any updates.

And lastly, I know we were supposed to be talking about leads, but I really like the ending of this blog post on the Guardian! (It makes fun of The Sunday Times' report and it's quite sarcastic.)

Finally an email from Othman herself would have prompted our Martian to trudge back to his spaceship. "It sounds really cool but I have to deny it," she said of the story. She will be attending a conference next week, but she'll be talking about how the world deals with "near-Earth objects".

Our alien will just have to try someone else, or stop reading the Sunday Times.

The blog post came with one noticeable line: This article is the subject of a legal complaint made by Jonathan Leake, science editor of The Sunday Times. Ops.

A bit of humor

Since we are talking about good and bad ledes in class, the heading "The Lede: Monkeys Sent to Guard Indian Games" posted on today's New York Times homepage caught my eye.

Initially, it got my attention because the title began with the words "The Lede". Once I read the lede, it was so unusual and amusing that it made me want to read the rest of the blog. The lede stated, "To thwart attacks by militant humans or hungry animals, India has deployed 100,000 security guards and 38 monkeys to secure venues in New Delhi ahead of the start of the Commonwealth Games this weekend." That being said, Robert Mackey, the blogger, could delete the beginning passive clause from the lede and just write, "India has deployed 100,000 security guards and 38 monkeys to secure venues in New Delhi ahead of the start of the Commonwealth Games this weekend." That would cover the who, where, what, how, and when by itself.

There wasn't a lot more information in the blog, but it was a fun, light-weight diversion in the midst of all the serious news. So, thought I would share.

Now this is just confusing

In my search for weak ledes, I found a great example yesterday. From a New York Times article by Andrew Martin:

"Is a football mainly for children? What about a Halloween costume or a model train?

None of the above, manufacturers say, as a new federal crackdown on dangerous toys has left some in the industry crying foul and not wanting to play."

What now? I had to re-read the lede several times to figure out its point. The opening sentence is just kind of strange, as is the second. The attempt at a clever turn of phrase at the end (crying foul and not wanting to play) is just forced and awkward. To be fair, the whole article (found here) is full of details that would be difficult to summarize in an interesting manner in a couple of opening sentences. However, the writer's attempt at a delayed lead is both confusing and and, frankly, unpleasant to read.

Good Lede/Bad Lede

Here is an interesting lede from The New York Times. It was effective in urging me to read on. However, that said, at the same time, there wasn't a great deal of information offered immediately:

"Would it be all right if the Leader of the Free World stopped by your campus for a little while?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/29/us/29land.html?ref=todayspaper


Another good one:

"The case has existed almost as long as independent India itself. Dating from 1950, the legal battle between Hindus and Muslims over a religious site in the city of Ayodhya began as a little-noticed title dispute. With a ruling finally expected on Thursday, the case has become something altogether different: a test of India’s secular soul."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/29/world/asia/29india.html?ref=world

It's clear, densely informative and interesting. I want to read more.


Not such a great lede:

Alan G. Hevesi, the former state comptroller, is poised to plead guilty to a felony corruption charge after a lengthy investigation into his office’s rewarding of pension investment business to firms that provided financial benefits to Mr. Hevesi and his aides, people with knowledge of the case said on Tuesday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/29/nyregion/29hevesi.html?ref=todayspaper

I found myself drifting halfway through this one. It is somewhat informative, but far too wordy (this coming from a writer with a tendency toward long-windedness).

Gruesome story on today's front page

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/09/29/toddler_3_others_slain_in_mattapan_officials_vow_arrests/

This is a good example of a typical hard-news lede. It also brought to my attention-description of the event by people who were present at that time. Here, there are two "ear-witnesses" who heard the shot first and then looked out of the window to be eye-witnesses later.

Although the story covered quotes from the mayor, investigating officials and members of the neighborhood, I think victims' families/relatives were not well-represented.

Examples of good and bad leads

Below are some examples of good and bad leads.

Examples of good leads:

Source: BBC

Article: Deadly landslide hits town in Southern Mexico

URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11429439

Lead: A landslide triggered by heavy rain has hit a town in southern Mexico, killing at least four people and engulfing a number of houses, officials say.

Reason it's a good lead: This lead does a good job of capturing what, how, where, and who. It is clear, concise, and gets to the point right away. It also grabs the readers attention.

Source: Boston Globe (Associated Press)

Article: Mass. Rep. Polito again blocks $400M spending bill

URL:http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/09/28/mass_rep_polito_again_blocks_400m_spending_bill/

Lead: BOSTON—Massachusetts Rep. Karyn Polito has blocked plans by House Democratic lawmakers to pass a $400 million midyear spending bill for a second straight day.

Reason it's a good lead: This is a good lead because it is focused, uses effective verbs and quickly answers where, who, what, when. At the same time, the lead/lede is interesting enough where it captures the readers attention.

Examples of bad leads:

Source: UN News Centre

Article: Ban stresses role of ‘Group of 77’ developing nations in advancing UN priorities

URL: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=36245&Cr=mdg&Cr1=

Lead: 28 September 2010 – From achieving global anti-poverty targets to tackling climate change and other critical environmental issues, the bloc of developing nations known as the “Group of 77 and China” has a vital role to play in ensuring progress on a host of priorities on the United Nations agenda, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said today.

Reason it's a bad lead: This is a bad lead/lede because it is too wordy with too many clauses. It goes off on mini tangents with its wordy clauses. It's confusing to the reader and can easily lose him or her. I had to read it twice to get the point, and I still wasn't sure I got it until I read the rest of the article.

Source: Boston Globe

Article: Merger could lift airfares in Boston

URL:http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2010/09/28/southwest_airtran_merger_means_less_price_competition/

Lead: Southwest Airlines said yesterday that it plans to buy rival AirTran for $1.42 billion, combining two of the nation’s biggest discount carriers in a move that could eventually mean higher ticket prices for some Boston travelers.

Reason it's a bad lead: This article's lead/lede is misleading although it is catchy and lures the reader to keep reading. It got my attention, but throughout the article, I kept wondering how & why will the Southwest / Airtran merger cause the prices to go higher? Mast of the article's supporting paragraph talks about costs getting lower, although the lead indicates the cost will be higher. There is only one blurb that touches upon lack of competition, translating it to higher ticket prices. The rest of the article seems to be supporting the opposite.

Where 1,000 words are worth more than a picture

The Poynter Institute was mentioned several times in class last week.

I saw this short blurb in one of the newsletters I receive and thought I would pass it along as an example of the work the Poynter Institute does.

I believe last week's discussion centered on how long it took a reader to be drawn in or to dismiss a story. While not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, turns out that in reading through a list of headlines on the Web, a headline has less than a second to capture a reader's attention.

Here's more:

Text is more important than images on the Web
By Gerry McGovern
Poynter Institute's Eyetrack III results reveal which headlines and blurbs attract online readers

The Web is primarily a text-driven medium and will remain so despite the rise of video.

“Dominant headlines most often draw the eye first upon entering the page—especially when they are in the upper left, and most often (but not always) when in the upper right,” according to Eyetrack III from Poynter Institute. This study of how people consume news websites found that, “Photographs, contrary to what you might expect (and contrary to findings of 1990 Poynter eyetracking research on print newspapers), aren't typically the entry point to a homepage. Text rules on the PC screen—both in order viewed and in overall time spent looking at it.”

In traditional print media it has long been established that images are more powerful than text in getting attention. But the opposite is the case on the Web. Text dominates. Consider the Google business model. It makes most of its money from advertising. What sort of advertising? AdWords. Text. Google has never sold a graphical ad on Google.com.

That is contrary to the traditional print and TV ad industry. There, the more color, the more fantastic the image, the bigger the impact. It’s the opposite on the Web.

What is interesting about Eyetrack III is how consistent its results are with various other Web behavior studies that have been conducted over the years. It’s long been known that the first couple of words are vital if you want to keep people reading. The study found that:

1. When people look at blurbs (summaries) under headlines on news homepages, they often only look at the left one-third of the blurb. In other words, most people just look at the first couple of words, and only read on if they are engaged by those words.

2. People typically scan down a list of headlines, and often don't view entire headlines. If the first words engage them, they seem likely to read on. On average, a headline has less than a second of a site visitor's attention. For headlines—especially longer ones—it would appear that the first couple of words need to be real attention-grabbers if you want to capture eyes.

The study found that average blurb length varies from a low of about 10 words to a high of 25, with most sites coming in at around 17. In 2009, Customer Carewords did a study of more than 500 news headlines. We found that 87 percent of headlines analyzed were between five and nine words long, with the most popular headline length being 7 words.

Some people think that I hate images and video. Absolutely not. Anyone who has seen my presentations will know that I use hardly any text. It’s all visuals and images. Why? Because after doing thousands of presentations I’ve found that telling a story based on a series of powerful images is very effective. A list of text-based bullet points bores people to death.

The issue is not whether text is inherently better than images. It’s about using the right tool for the right medium. On the Web, text dominates. Will there be exceptions? Of course, but they will be exceptions that prove the rule: text dominates.

Gerry McGovern is the founder and CEO of Customer Carewords and New Thinking e-mail newsletter. Contact Gerry at gerry@gerrymcgovern.com.

Shocking and sad

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/09/27/book_details_motives_for_suicide_at_harvard/?page=1

Who knows what goes on in a person' mind. It makes me wonder if being alone for long (and that includes drowning in books) and thinking a lot about life is depressing. These are some thoughts that this story provoked in me. Back to Journalism:

The reporter has done a good job of getting quotes from the deceased's mother, sister and roommate. While we are talking about ledes, I like this lede because it is action-packed. I also like the use of words "In the end" which are symbolic of Heisman's suicide as well as "Day of Atonement" which also syncs with the idea of death. I wish the lede was shorter though. Instead of crafting a 56-word long sentence, I would cut the extra 20 words as:

In the end, no one knows why Heisman, 35, fired one shot from a silver revolver into his right temple, on the top step of Memorial Church in Harvard Yard, on the Jewish Day of Atonement.

The facts that he was a Jew or that he was learned could follow in the body.

Its all about language

It is uplifting to see a story about language on the front page of the newspaper. In " 'Genius Grant' a lift to linguist as she revives a native language", found here: http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/articles/2010/09/28/reviving_wampanoag_earns_linguist_a_genius_grant/

"Jessie Little Doe Baird was overcome at the news that her 17 years of linguistic work — resurrecting the language the Wampanoag people spoke and wrote until at least the mid-1800s — had landed her a MacArthur Fellows “genius grant’’ of $500,000."

On its face, this is a story of the MacArthur Fellow "genius grant" awarded Baird for her work, but the more interesting content appears halfway through the piece, where several facets of a fascinating story emerge.

This is really the story of an ancient language (10,000 years old) that became a written language several hundred years ago, and what this means for a people (the Wampanoag) and the communities that have lived in southern New England since the time when the Wampanoag were the areas only human inhabitants.

"According to Baird, her ancestors were "the first American Indian people to use an alphabetic writing system," and the first Bible published on this continent -- a key document in her research -- was printed in 1663 in Wompanoag."

Baird explains the motivation for acquiring an alphabet and written language, which, she claims, was the legal protection of their resources. The result was a rich collection of the " land transfers, wills, personal letters," resulting in the “the largest collection of native written documents on the continent.’’

But there is also the sub-story, that I think deserves elaboration, of how Baird, a Cape Cod, high school educated, human service worker took on the task of resurrecting the lost Wampanoag language by becoming a MIT-trained linguist.

Finally, there is the other sub-story, described in one sentence, but worthy of many more, of how Baird came to devote her life to this project through a series of dreams in which her ancestors spoke to her in a language she could not understand.

What a delight of a story that could have been a series...or a book.

Aw, c'mon

Feel sorry for the reporters who had to cover the Netflix introduction in Canada.

This story -- Netflix apologizes for using actors to meet press at Canadian launch -- from The Globe and Mail marks a new low by PR people trying to score coverage.

Here's a link to the story:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/netflix-apologizes-for-using-actors-to-meet-press-at-canadian-launch/article1718924/

Now, it's accepted as fair game for PR people to fill out events with "extras" -- these are usually employees who are sent to the conference or promotion to help build a crowd. (First, if there is a bunch of people hanging around in one area, it tends to attract others. Second, these events usually feature a company executive, so it's to employees' advantage to participate.)

For this promotion, Netflix hired actors to play the parts of "geeks" and other customer-types to create the crowd (expensive, but not necessarily unethical). Netflix went over the line in allowing/encouraging the actors to lie about their identities when interviewed by the press.

Why is this case particularly upsetting (and by the way, it came to my attention through mediabistro.com, so the working press must have found it offensive as well)?

First, there are fewer reporters to cover an increasing number of "events," so wasting these professionals' time is just wrong. If people agree to be interviewed by a reporter, it's understood that they should tell the truth.

Second, this is the tip of a troubling trend in media relations. It's one thing to try to attract coverage. It's quite another to deliberately hire people to misrepresent themselves to the press. (If you want to see another example of this unethical behavior, see the Los Angeles Times story about the toy "expert.")

Quitting journalism

I just read a very interesting blog post on the site A Very Curious Mind (http://tinyurl.com/3427swz). It is by a magazine journalist, or I guess I should say a former magazine journalist, who was, at least in my opinion, at the top of her game. She was listed on the masthead of Inc. magazine and that says "success" to me.

The author, Allison Wellner, talks about going on an assignment where she was to observe a group of executives going through a multi-day wilderness leadership program through the National Outdoor Leadership School. Her assignment was to observe the execs and watch their conflicts, struggles and victories, then tell their story. And, she reports, she did so very successfully.

The experience, however, left her with an uneasy feeling about her own role in the event. Certainly she was a participant - she backpacked along with the execs - but her story, her experiences are pointedly left out. That brought home for her the adage that journalists are always selling out. She quotes directly from Janet Malcom's work The Journalist and the Murderer: “Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full himself to notice what’s going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible. He is a kind of confidence man, preying on people’s vanity, ignorance or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

She is struggling with the identity, as she puts it, of being a bemused monarch observing her subjects.

I found this post particularly poignant because I have always struggled with this issue and I think it goes back to the class discussion from a couple weeks ago about journalistic ethics. It is why I have always avoided journalism classes and becoming a "reporter."

I've always felt that a reporter's mere presence in a situation effects it and changes it. That may not be the case for a simple report on a tragic car accident but it rings true in anything bigger than that. A reporter always brings his own biases, opinions, prejudices to a situation and sees the events (say of a court case) unfold through his own eyes.

When we interview someone about their most frightening experience, we experience their moment through our own fears. When we write about it, we choose the moments that speak to us most directly. We color their story through our own blurred vision. I think the only way to avoid this is the not "write" a story but to "transcribe" the exact events as they happen. It would be what a security camera records, with no edits or viewpoint changes. And that would be a tragic loss of great storytelling and would be painfully boring.

I think it is almost necessary for a journalist - or just a writer if that's what you want to call yourself (I do) - to put himself into a story. I think that we want to know more than just the 5W; we want to know what to feel, how to react, when to be angry, when to laugh. I don't think that this is a willingness to give up our own choice of reaction; I think that often, when faced with tragedy beyond our normal scope, we don't know how to react and a reporters interpretation of events helps us to know the appropriate response. It is a guide.

And I don't think that allowing a journalist to insert himself into a story is unethical. The only unethical thing would be if he intentionally misquotes someone or leaves out a fact in order to color a story. I think there is plenty of room for the facts, the reporter and the truth in any story.

But maybe that's the difference between magazine journalism and newspaper journalism.

Today's Front Page

This interesting site shows you the front pages of newspapers from around the world. Click on the orange dot of your desired city and the entire page will pop up in a new window. If it's too difficult to read the tiny prints, click on "readable PDF" on the top right corner. There's also a link to the newspaper's website. This site is good for people like me who somehow prefer to have a feel of the printed newspaper. It's also great to see how other papers arrange the layout of their front pages, and what kind of stories are placed on the front pages.

According to the FAQ, more than 800 newspapers from around the world submit their front pages to the site every morning. Happy reading!

Today's article in the New York Times, "Mexico Paper, a Drug Victim, Call for a Voice," relates a sad state of journalistic affairs in Cuidad Juarez. Described by journalist Randal Archibald as "by turns defiant and deferential" El Diario in Juarez is pleading with the local drug lords to tell them what the paper can safely print. The open letter ran the day after the funeral of an intern photographer for the paper. He was 21. The Committee to Protect Journalists has reported that more than 30 journalists have either been killed or disappeared since the drug wars have intensified. More than 28,000 people have been killed.

Although assistant editor, Pedro Torres, says El Diario "will not stop coverage," one can only wonder what the paper can possibly print without endangering the lives of its journalists. At what point does the safety of the reporter outweigh the demands of the story? The public deserves to be informed, but at what cost?

Click on the attached link to read the article in its entirety. Please post comments.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/world/americas/21mexico.html

What is the human face of the current economic disaster?

In the New York Times article found here, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/business/economy/20older.html?ref=todayspaper writer Motoko Rich explores a facet of the current unemployment picture, the difficulties faced by the middle aged jobless, by featuring the story of 57 year old Patricia Reid, who was laid off four years ago after twenty years at Boeing as an internal auditor and analyst.

The economy is a major story of the present time, and yet there is little journalism in major papers that sheds light on the human suffering associated with huge unemployment.

Unfortunately, Rich’s story starts with a lukewarm lead: “Patricia Reid is not in her 70’s, an age when many Americans continue to work.” Huh? Perhaps he should have led with Reid’s comment buried halfway through the article, “We’re circling the drain here, and I’m bailing like hell.”

The background research is not balanced. There are six sources, but they are all institutional: AARP, the Census Bureau, the Labor Department, an academic, WorkSource and the Gallup Poll. This makes the article only slightly less numbing than those that are purely economic, relying solely on facts and figures. If the writer had interviewed others in Pat’s age group in more depth (there are a few snippets from her classmates in a WorkSource training session) the article might have had more power and been more interesting to read.

I think it is of paramount importance to portray the human cost of the economic slump if citizens are to have the knowledge they need to make responsible (not kneejerk) political judgments, and I have seen very little such reporting, except for superficial reviews of people who have lost their homes.

Getting a Response From the Media Relations Department

I just saw a story on Good Morning America that I believe should be read by every journalism student as well as every media-relations person.

The story involves Apple's Steve Jobs and a journalism student's request for cooperation on a piece that was a class assignment. Here's the link:
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/apple-ceo-steve-jobs-liu-student-chelsea-kate/story?id=11686415

Now whether you are (a) on Apple's side (b) support the student (c) think each side has made good points and/or mistakes, here are some observations:

* Media-relations teams are bombarded with requests from working journalists -- and this now includes bloggers. If the journalism student was writing for a school news outlet, she was correct in requesting help from Media Relations; if this was for a journalism class, she should have made her requests through customer service (customer-service folks are amazing and have a knack for regularly delivering the impossible).

* If a student still wants to make a request for a class project via Media Relations, make the first request at least 10 working days in advance and in the request email -- never voicemail -- have a short explanation of the project, bullet-point exact questions and give Media Relations at least two full working days to respond. Remember to include your contact information.

* Many media-relations people have been on the side of the student, so if the request is made respectfully (in both prose and timeline)and has a decent storyline, most of the time the request will be answered with information. The CEO may not do a phoner, but it's possible another person in the company will.

* CEOs are human. They only have 24 hours in a day, and not every day is their best one. If Jobs did indeed write the messages (which I am not entirely sure he did as there has not been a response from Apple), he/his ghost writer would have been better off not to respond...old saying about "if you can't say something nice, say nothing."

* Students, especially, need to have a list of relevant sources as options to interview for stories -- we can't just wait for Steve Jobs to respond. While quotes from Steve Jobs probably would have helped this student's story, professionally completing the assignment on deadline is more important.

* The reporter always has the option of including "Emails and phone calls to Apple Media Relations and Steve Jobs were unanswered as of press time."

Sources and balance

I read this touching story and was thinking of our class discussion about sources and how they bring balance to the piece. This is, I feel, not a great example of balance though. Here, there are five community members/victims who are pleading for help to get out of the dire circumstances they are in. On the other hand, there is only one authority figure who comes out as cold-hearted.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/world/americas/20haiti.html?ref=world

Cool Breeze

As we are coming up on our journalist profile, I noticed a similar-type story in the New York Times that actually was published on the Web late last week, but lead the Sunday Style section page today. (OK, that does seem sort of Twilight Zone, but that is a different blog post entirely.)

Anyhow, the story was about fashionista's Rachel Zoe's main assistant and has the headline "Brad Goreski, the Zelig of Fashion Week." I've tried to post the link here, but have been unsuccessful, so please just GoogleNews Goreski to call up the story.

The reporter Ben Widdicombe did a nice job with the piece, drawing a good picture in a light, breezy and -- mercifully -- quick read. I mention the last attribute, because these are the types of stories that easily can become ponderous, especially when you note that Widdicombe interviewed at least the following "authorities" on Goreski (and probably others as well):

- Goreski himself;
- Goreski's client Cameron Diaz;
- designer Chris Benz;
- costume designer for TV's Mad Men, Jane Bryant;
- Goreski's boss, Rachel Zoe;
- Goreski's mother, Debby Goreski.

Widdicombe interviewed Goreski in at least two scenarios, at what seemed like a sit-down at the Mercer Hotel, and possibly just briefly at a fashion show (it was Fashion Week in New York last week).

Bottomline: a good example of a well-rounded profile.

RESEARCH ABOUT EX DICTATORS IN SOUTH FLORIDA

The following is a link to an article in the Miami new times.

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2010-09-16/news/latin-american-dictators-love-south-florida/

It speaks about dictators and tyrants who moved to South Florida. We were speaking of sources and it is interesting that the author here mentions his sources in particular;

“So we plumbed property records, consulted historians, and dived into overflowing boxes of lawsuits.”

The background research for this article is well executed. The same cannot be said of the article itself. Although the topic is fascinating, the author’s voice seems so unique that it overshadows the subject matter.

The author uses words like “turd” and “hancho.” I can understand he may want to write about these dictators in a comical or light manner, but when it comes to these type of dictators it just seems inappropriate.

Pew Research

I'm posting a link below from PewResearch.org -- and I hope it works -- for some data about how the U.S. consumes news. The good part is, people do seem to be increasingly following current events; how they follow is another story.

Anyway, you can sign up for Pew Research emails, which are not only interesting, but worth following to see what research individual news outlets choose to highlight.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1725/where-people-get-news-print-online-readership-cable-news-viewers

The awkward art of the recap intro

I was reading through the New York Times recaps of this week's football games, not expecting to find anything useful for this blog. However, I began to notice that recaps are not necessarily as cut-and-dry as I assumed. Consider the first two paragraphs of Howard Ulman's recap of the Patriots-Bengals season opener:

"Tom Brady survived a frightening car crash, signed a rich contract and ended his week with what he wants most: a win.

The quarterback who makes headlines on and off the field threw two of his three touchdown passes to Wes Welker, who returned after a speedy recovery from a serious knee injury, and led the New England Patriots to a 38-24 opening win over the Cincinnati Bengals on Sunday."

Recaps serve a very basic purpose in sportswriting: to describe the events of a game. However, I noticed that they often open with a quick and dirty human interest angle. The opening paragraph is fairly awkward, to be honest, and it jumps very rapidly to a description of the game, and then suddenly (mid-sentence, no less) to another angle of interest (Wes Welker's return from injury).

Recaps routinely open in this sort of fashion: an awkwardly phrased intro that sets up some sort of drama and allows for an easy segue into the description of the game. Here is Barry Wilner's intro to a recap of the Jets-Ravens game: "The Baltimore Ravens starred in this version of "Hard Knocks," punishing the New York Jets with plenty of them."

Wilner refers to the HBO show "Hard Knocks", which followed the Jets preseason, and uses it to make a pun about the Ravens' defensive performance.

Or how about Chris Duncan's intro to his story on the Colts-Texans game: "It took a record day by an undrafted running back for the Houston Texans to end years of frustration against Peyton Manning and the Indianapolis Colts. "

How's that for drama? An undrafted running back, leading his team to victory after years of futility against a powerhouse rival and their superstar quarterback.

That intro works quite well, I think. It relies on a story from the game, and doesn't try to jam a smorgasbord of information to create drama like the Ulman recap. Recapping games is not as easy as I've long thought, I think, and writing a good intro is probably the most challenging aspect of the form.

Interviews vs. Depositions

While writing my invisible person piece I realized that my interview skills were lacking. It made me appreciate the brilliance of people like Diane Rehm on NPR who are great at taking interviews. I’m sure she has question she writes down, but when an interview takes a life of its own she know exactly what questions to ask.

Many times it’s something that has to be spontaneous. Once the moment is past to ask the right question, it’s very hard to back. The rhythm of the interview is lost.
As an attorney I take depositions for a living. These are very similar to interviews. However, the difference with depositions is that you can take as long as you want and always go back to questions that pop up in your head.

It’s like if your brain is somehow digesting the previous information and then out of nowhere a new question or issue arises. However, in journalism this opportunity to go back is rarely an option. I hope that interviewing is an acquired skill.

Lack of Analysis in Immigration

The immigration issue and bias came up often in the first two classes. The Harvard student incident was specifically mentioned. I found this interesting because I have following the immigration issue closely and never heard of this case. Perhaps, because I live in Miami and the media here is somewhat conservative and found that this story would enrage audience who are looking to bash immigrants and not help them . A link to this story can be found below.

http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2010/06/19/officials_harvard_student_will_not_be_deported/

This story is short and straight forward. It does not go into politics and arguments and counterarguments. This is a bit refreshing as the issue of immigration is a very volatile one and it has tendency to provoke strong reactions from an audience. What bothers me about immigration stories and commentary in the current media is lack of true analysis. We often hear arguments like,” they should get in line.” These could be quotes from the common man or a sheriff in Arizona, but reporting them is problematic. True reporting and analysis would show that there is no line and that immigrations mechanisms are arbitrary, antiquated, and irrational.

Lack of analysis or background is not only a problem in the immigration debate, but also in most legally related matters. It’s almost as if bias is built to any sort of reporting on legal matters (like the pizza murder discussed in class) because lack of knowledge and understanding leaves a lot of room for the reporter and audience to make assumptions. The reporting of these assumptions then becomes rampant and leads to misconceptions that then influence public opinion and policy. For example, it could be argued that assumptions about illegal immigration lead to misconceptions that influence the public and legislature which lead to laws such as the one passed in Arizona. Of course, the matter becomes even more convoluted when the media reports on the Federal Court proceedings to pass an injunction against the law. Most media focuses on guttural public reactions instead of interviewing an unbiased constitutional law professor to really analyze the issue.

Speaking of "Invisible Person", how about "Invisible People"?

I enjoyed working on the "Invisible Person" assignment for our class. Why? Because the #1 reason I want to explore journalism is to learn how I can be a voice for those that are not "sexy enough" to make the front page news coverage. Speaking of an "invisible person", how about "invisible people"?

I couldn't find any coverage regarding France's deportation of approximately 8000 Romas (also known as "Gypsies") on the home page of The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The Washington Post, USA Today, CNN, MSNBC, or FOX News. However, once I dug further, I eventually managed to find it on one of CNN's websites. Later, I also found a news agency that covered it as its top home page story, but it was an European newspaper, BBC.

Is the lack of front page coverage of the Romas by American news agencies a result of Romas being "invisible people" or is it merely omitted because Romas are not of "local interest" in America? Which brings me to my next question, how do news editors know what the local population will find "interesting" if its readers are unaware that the story (or in this case, an ethnic group) even exists? Thoughts?

Articles:

• "European Commission blasts France's deportation of Roma" by CNN
• "EU may take legal action against France over Roma" by BBC

Example: Reporter Captures 5 Ws as the Story Unfolds

Here's a great example of reporting while the story is breaking:

The BBC article regarding the Eiffel Tower bomb threat sticks to the basic facts and captures the initial 5 Ws while awaiting more information: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11302294

Article: "Eiffel Tower Evacuated After Bomb Threat"

Journalsim about journalists

In the past week I have encountered two rather parallel examples of the journalist becoming not just the focus but the cause of a story. As the general populace suffers the problems of private and public life becoming indistinguishable the journalist seems to be in a particularly risky place. It isn’t just the TV news anchor or commentator who has signed away his protection as a private citizen. Many are now just as eager to expose the people behind the exposes as they are to thrust their own selves misguidedly into the public sphere.

I thought this was interesting and startling: The New York Times did a piece in The Arts section about this guy named Ted Genoways, a young and talented man, who took over the staid yet small publication the Virgina Quarterly Review which is published out of the University of Virginia. Helping bring it big accolades, everyone celebrated Genoways until the managing editor killed himself. The story, which goes so far as to assert a connection between the stress Genoways put on his staff and the suicide also alleges his shirking of responsibilities, abusive interpersonal interactions and general bad management without attributing to many named sources:

“Then on July 30, the review’s managing editor, Kevin Morrissey, took a gun to a coal tower on the outskirts of town and killed himself, an act that some of Mr. Morrissey’s friends and family attributed partly to stress in the workplace — even going so far as to lay that stress publicly at Mr. Genoways’s door.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/books/11quarterly.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&sq=virginia%20quarterly%20review&st=cse&scp=1)

Since the investigation is ongoing and at this point only being carried out by the university, I felt that much of this story walked the line of libel as the implications are clear and unretractable - whether or not Genoways is found responsible for any real crime.

In more slanderous news, I discovered a contact and acquaintance of mine is facing a career meltdown after former staff members took to a blog (which aspires to be a pop news hub) to anonymously bash everything he had done as EIC of his magazine. This guy had started a cutting-edge music mag that saw some national exposure in Borders etc. which ended up folding. The accusations range from bad editorial decisions to sexual harassment, racism, financial delinquency and outright fraud. The posts have been up since June and the chronicles are both epic and demoralizing. Despite his Cease and Desist letters the blog host will not remove the posts. Although I’d like to get your opinion of the posts and the legitimacy of the stories, I’d rather not perpetuate a bad situation by re-posting any part of them or linking you to them (but I will if you insist). Whether or not this guy is guilty of the transgressions I wonder how professional – or legal – and never mind decent it was for these people to go so far as to make these damaging and unsubstantiated accusations. It also points to the ever-growing issue of free-speech on the internet and whether or not a blog is a news outlet like any other that must operate with under the same legal parameters.

The headline with direct link

Richard L. Connor: Newspaper Apologizes to Those Offended

An overreaction?

While in Maine over the weekend I spotted this article on the front page of the Portland Press Herald, flanked by several PAGES (not just articles) of 9/11 memorial stories.

I had a strong visceral reaction to it and I would love to hear/read your thoughts about it, from personal and journalistic perspectives.

http://www.pressherald.com/news/newspaper-apologizes-to-those-offended_2010-09-12.html

At the risk of sounding 'insensitive,' I don't believe that marking the end of Ramadan in a newspaper article displays any disrespect toward the events of 9/11; the two are unrelated. While a follow-up story could have been printed about the widespread public reaction, I think that an apology or a retraction of the original story are both unnecessary.

Is this:
a political move (going against popular opinion)?
a personal decision (an editor's sense of conscience)?
a financial one (fear of losing advertising and readership)?
none or all of the above?

Perception, the truth and the press

I was very impressed with the discussion we had in class this week that focused on the Boston Globe's story about the slain pizza-delivery man.

As I mentioned, I am a former longtime newspaper reporter and most lately a PR person. I bring this up because PR people deal a lot in "messaging." Messaging involves not only the crux of the info we want to convey, but the words we use to tell the story.

Anyhow, the thing that really rang out for me was that the assistant DA had a very compelling story to tell, essentially speaking as the voice of the murdered father. It goes a bit further though, because the assistant DA also told the story well.

Why is this important?

It's important because deft messaging influences the way the reporter writes the story -- and this has absolutely nothing to do with the reporter's impartiality. (And it certainly doesn't mean that even if somebody is lying but his/her delivery is slick that the reporter will buy it.)

Just thought I would mention, as it is another way to look at news stories, and why certain angles get played up more than others.

USA Today Story on Muslim Victims of 911

The USA Today article, "For families of Muslim 911 victims, a new pain", reminded me of Lee Bollinger's quote in Samuel G. Freedman's book, Letters to a Young Journalist. It stated, "The most valued [trait] is that of having the imaginative range and the mental courage to explore the full complexity of the subject. To set aside one's preexisting beliefs, to hold simultaneously in one's mind multiple angles of seeing things, to allow yourself to believe another point of view as you consider it ...The stress is on seeing the difficulty of things, on being prepared to live closer than we are inclined to the harsh reality."

Given the current controversy of building a mosque 2 blocks from ground zero and a rise in anti-Muslim sentiments, the USA Today reporter, Rick Hampson, could've written about 911's non-Muslim families affected by the loss of a loved one. However, by writing about Muslim families that also lost their loved ones, Rick Hampson’s article tampers with a perspective which is often missed when covering surviving family members of 911 victims.

Looking forward to your thoughts on the article.

While we are talking about unconventional leads!

Carrying it forward from yesterday evening's class discussion of unusual leads, for example the one we looked at closely in class; this one strikes me:

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/algae-blooms-were-not-red-tide-officials-say/?hpw

"Yes, that stuff floating in the water last week was reddish, but no, it was not red tide. "

What about the 5 W's? But I guess even "that stuff" works!

I read this quote couple of times to confirm!

http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2010/09/09/tourist_crowds_threaten_vaticans_

sistine_chapel/

I read Paolucci's quote over and over again thinking I may be reading wrong. But I wasn't!

"In this chapel people often invoke the Holy Spirit. But the people who fill this room every day aren't pure spirits," Paolucci told the newspaper. The part of the quote "People who fill this room aren't pure spirits," puzzled me. Was Paolucci intending to make a pun out of "pure spirits" or was he mis communicating or even less probable was he misinterpreted? Well, only Paolucci can tell.

Examples of Court Story - Dull vs Colourful

Since we’ve just looked at an example of court reporting, I’d like to share a court story that was published recently in an English newspaper in Malaysia.

(Story background: A political aide was summoned to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) office on July 15 last year to be questioned over the irregular disbursement of the state funds. He was found dead on the fifth floor service corridor of the building the next day. Did he commit suicide? Or was it a homicide? An inquest is taking place to find out the cause of his death.)

This story is quite straightforward and dull, if compared with the example we read in class. The journalist plainly reported the conversation between the counsel and the forensic pathologist.

There are two arresting paragraphs in this story (because of the content, not the writing style):

1. When Abdul Razak asked Dr Pornthip if, as an expert witness, she had to be fair and not take sides, she replied that she worked for the rights of the dead and not for the Selangor Government or for anyone else.

2. But when Abdul Razak asked Dr Pornthip if she had ever jumped out of a window, council representing the Selangor Government Malik Imtiaz Sarwar said: “With questions like these, we would all want to jump out.”

I felt that these two quotes would make pretty strong and attention-grabbing leads, but the journalist had chosen a safe one. However, if the journalist had started off the story with either of these, it would have set a certain direction or tone, resulting in a biased report.

For instance, if he had chosen the first quote, he would somehow make Dr Pornthip appear heroic. If the second quote was used, the readers might straightaway label Abdul Razak as “unreasonable and insensible”.

In contrast to this story, an online news portal provided a more interesting coverage, using adjectives and adding in some descriptions of what happened in the court.

Examples:

1. “You have to understand. I work for the rights of the dead, not the Selangor government,” she told the Coroner’s Court, drawing applause from a packed gallery, after Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) lawyer Datuk Abdul Razak Musa had questioned her qualification.

2. After telling Abdul Razak that she was working for the rights of the dead, she added that “my objective is to help the dead.” Undaunted, Abdul Razak asked the Thai pathologist why she did not consider what transpired the night before Teoh was found dead.

3. At one point, Dr Pornthip even asked Abdul Razak if was indeed a lawyer, drawing more laughter from the gallery. Abdul Razak said he had been a lawyer for 24 years. In what became a battle of wits, Abdul Razak also suggested that Dr Pornthip kept changing her position and “the goalpost.”

Its lead is also very different from the one in the first story:

As Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand faced relentless questions today about her qualifications and her testimony, the Thai forensic expert delivered what could perhaps be the line that fortifies her credibility as an expert witness in the Teoh Beng Hock inquest.

It is also interesting to note that the earlier story came with a headline of "MACC and pathologist trade barbs" (safe) while the second story had "Pornthip: I work for rights of the dead, not Selangor government" (attention-grabbing) as its headline.

Many readers will no doubt prefer to read the second story (including myself), even though it might not be totally objective in the eyes of journalists (honestly, the readers don't care about this point). So, I guess we have to ask ourselves what we want to achieve - an engaging story that would attract the readers, or a plain story that informs the readers on what happened and let them make their own judgement.

How do we strike a balance in between?

Boston Globe on yellow jackets

A pair of Boston Globe reporters did a good job of covering what seems like a cut-and-dried story: A woman was stung 500 times by yellow jackets after she apparently disturbed a nest by mistake.

This just could have been straight cop-shop stuff, but instead the duo interviewed the fire chief whose company rescued the victim along with:

* a state official in agricultural services;
* a specialist on bees from a California university;
*an additional fire chief from a nearby area who had to rescue children from a similar experience, and
* two pest-control professionals.

The story gave good details about why yellow-jacket attacks happen more frequently at this time of year and what to do to prevent attracting/disturbing the insects.

The reporting was excellent, although -- and this is very subjective -- I thought the lede was weak. I'm just glad I got beyond it to the good information.

NYT 9/11 coverage

The angles that the New York Times has offered in its 9/11 coverage this week span a wide spectrum:

In Sunday's Style section there was a story on how people mark their birthdays if they were born on Sept. 11. Frankly, if I were the reporter and got that assignment, I would have been nonplussed. (Who knows, though, maybe the reporter came up with the idea.) But the story was well-written enough to be played on the section front, so I give the writer a lot of credit.

Monday's Times offered the Bill Keller story -- which was one of the most emailed stories in that edition. The piece quoted some who attended the Keller gathering at the Marriott. No matter which side of that debate you are on, I don't think you could have come away from that article without feeling some despair.

Today's piece on how the family of Brooke Jackman is honoring this young woman (who was murdered in the collapse of the towers in the 9/11 catastrophe) is actually inspiring. Ironically, Ms. Jackman was preparing to leave a brief career at Cantor Fitzgerald and was headed for graduate school for a social-work degree. Today, her family keeps her memory alive by promoting literacy for elementary-school children. The family deserves a lot of credit, because they are responding by putting hope into the future. That isn't easy: A child dying before a parent is its own hell; a child being murdered has to plummet a parent into an inconsolable abyss.

Warning! Proceed with caution.

Hey everyone!

A little introduction about myself – I am Xin from Malaysia, a distance student of this course.

I thought I’d share something light-hearted with you in my first post here. My colleague shared this link on Facebook and I just couldn’t help but laugh out loud. I guess all of us with journalism background could relate to the “warnings”.

Out of the 10 “warnings”, I have to admit that I am guilty of at least three. This is a bit embarrassing, but let’s explore some of them:-

#1 This article contains unsourced, unverified information from Wikipedia.

When we are not sure of something, we always turn to Google. And then it always brings us to Wikipedia, which format and formality seem to have made the information appeared quite reliable. We try to check more sites, but more often than not, most of them have the exact lines as Wikipedia. However, if we are really unsure of something, we’d rather stick to an editor’s advice - “When in doubt, leave it out!”

#2 This article is based on an unverified, anonymous tipoff.

Although we are always asked to double check our facts, sometimes we tend to trust our sources too much. It’s of course better to have more than just one contact in a particular organisation, as I always find “talking to just one more person” very useful. I will end up with some new information for my story.

#3 To ensure future interviews with subject, important questions were not asked.

The fear of losing the contact conquers it all!

#4 This article is basically just a press release, copied and pasted.

Well… what can I say? When we can’t seem to find the right words to describe the restaurant that “brings Italian conviviality and contemporary America together in a casual atmosphere, resulting in the creation of time-honoured recipes with novel flavours”,* a well-written press release comes in very handy! (But honestly, we always try to write as much as we can and only pluck a very few words from the press release.)

*just an example taken from a website of a restaurant

#5 Journalist does not understand the subject they are writing about.

Sometimes I find myself in this dilemma as I work in a section that covers a myriad of stories (local news, fashion shows, food reviews, art exhibitions, assorted events, etc). Once, I had to interview a real estate agent, who was in town to conduct a seminar with the local agents. The industry was totally alien to me and I went back to the newsroom with only a few usable quotes. I wrote a story (and it was published) but whenever I read it again, I remembered the struggle of putting the paragraphs together.

#6 Journalist hiding their own opinions by using phrases like "some people claim".

I like this one! It's normally used in commentaries. Journalists tend to believe that our opinions are the same as the people's... since we are also part of the society, right?

***

Writing this reminds me of the journalism values and ethics I learned in school. Accuracy, credibility, fairness, objectivity, accountability... It has been a long time since I last give serious thought to these values.

Welcome, students!

This is the first post of our class blog, and as such, it's purely informational. Soon, you'll help fill the blog with insightful observations on the craft of journalism and what's happening in the news.

In the syllabus are instructions about specific issues you should think about and address, but also feel free to use this blog to post other observations on ideas discussed in class, thoughts on the journalism industry and related stories that interest you or highlight concepts discussed in class. Also comment on others' posts. Let's have a conversation!

To make the most of your posts, when writing about a news article, create a link to the article. Describe or quote enough of the original to give your classmates a sense of the article -- but don't cut and paste the whole thing, or even a long passage -- then highlight a piece of text and use the link button just above the text box. It looks like this:

Please remember that posts and comments should always be respectful. Feel free to challenge the news and what you read, and agree or disagree with your fellow students, but keep it clean and polite. Challenge the position, not the person.

Many students in past classes have gone on to create their own blogs, so don't just look at this as another assignment. Have fun, and explore the possibilities of the blog. This is a place for you to have an ongoing, open conversation, and it should be a place where you can have fun!