Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Out-Of-Class #2: What Journalism Really Is
This week, I received the following email from one of youze:
> Hello,
> After doing some research on why higher education faces increased
> tuition costs, I started to understand why this has been happening at
> MSU and how it relates to the current state of the economy. Instead
> of having my paper focus on why MSU is increasing tuition but still
> spending money on adding amenities to campus, such as Wi-Fi in dorms,
> I wanted to focus on the spending cuts and how it is affecting higher
> education.
>
> My new topic idea is:
> Spending cuts made by the state and the Budget Control Act are
> affecting the funding for higher education. The spending cuts being
> made are increasing tuition and reducing the quality of education due
> to program cuts and faculty cuts (among other things). I will focus
> on how MSU is currently receiving its funding, how much did tuition
> increase this year, what are the things being done to reduce excess
> spending on campus, and what is being done to help students with the
> increasing cost of tuition.
>
> I wanted to get your approval on this topic so I can begin to write my paper.
>
And my answer was an enthusiastic YES! Not simply because you were switching the topic, but because you were switching the topic based on where the facts were taking you!
And THAT is journalism. Journalism isn't starting with an initial assumption and then finding facts to support it. That's a term paper. Rather, journalism is starting with an initial assumption, then seeing where the facts take you. Sometimes, research finds that the initial premise was correct. Other times, not so much. And still other times you discover things that support a premise that's better than the original one.
It's that process of research and then determining what you actually have that is journalism. That's what separates it from simply finding out about stuff; it's that discovery through doing reporting.
It's like being a detective: you start out with a dead body, and then you start interviewing people to see what you can find out. You may start out with one suspect, but the evidence might take you to another suspect -- or none at all, if you find facts showing it was an accidental or natural death, or a suicide. Either way, you follow the facts, and you make your final determination on the facts you find, rather than simply what you initially presumed.
Ideally, each of us will have a story that evolves this way. I'm glad at least one of us did, so the rest of us can see this process in action.
Stats: Nutty Over Nut Grafs
A lede gets to the bottom line of a story. The nut graf answers questions created by the lede, and offers facts and details that directly support the lede's premise.
For us to correctly form a proper nut graf, we must correctly identify what the central point of the lede is.
Here was a common lede/nut graf pairing for this exercise:
And here's the problem: based on the nut graf, you would think the major premise of the lede is that the census bureau had a study. That's because the nut graf details what the study is and how it's conducted.
But let's think back to what makes a good lede: it's not that something happened (e.g., MSU played Notre Dame in football); it's what, exactly, happened (MSU beat Notre Dame 107-0).
Based on that, the central premise here isn't that there was a study; it's what the study found.
In this following lede/nut graf pairing, the correct question created by the lede isn't that there was a study; it's that the study found dramatic growth, so what was that growth, and how was it dramatic? Then the nut graf answers that by providing statistics that indeed show dramatic growth:
For us to correctly form a proper nut graf, we must correctly identify what the central point of the lede is.
Here was a common lede/nut graf pairing for this exercise:
The major findings of the U.S. Census
Bureau are showing that owning a computer and use of the Internet are becoming
common among many American households.
Each
month the U.S. Census Bureau conducts the Current Population Survey (CPS), a large nationally represented survey of approximately 50,000 households, at
regular intervals for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Over time, the CPS has
come to be used as a tool for measuring a wide variety of economic, demographic
and social conditions of the U.S. population on a recurring basis.
And here's the problem: based on the nut graf, you would think the major premise of the lede is that the census bureau had a study. That's because the nut graf details what the study is and how it's conducted.
But let's think back to what makes a good lede: it's not that something happened (e.g., MSU played Notre Dame in football); it's what, exactly, happened (MSU beat Notre Dame 107-0).
Based on that, the central premise here isn't that there was a study; it's what the study found.
In this following lede/nut graf pairing, the correct question created by the lede isn't that there was a study; it's that the study found dramatic growth, so what was that growth, and how was it dramatic? Then the nut graf answers that by providing statistics that indeed show dramatic growth:
The United States
Census Bureau recently conducted a survey focused on household computer and
Internet use, showing dramatic growth in computer ownership since 1984.
Personal computers
first began to enter households in the early 1980s with 8.2 percent of homes
owning a computer, according to the study. That number has increased to 61.8
percent of 113.1 million American households today.
Stats: Math Is Hard
Be careful with numbers. Make sure you say what you mean, and you mean what you say, and that you understand what you say.
For example, let's look at this passage:
The U.S. Census Bureau ... (found) 61.8 percent have computers, an increase of almost 54 percent since 1984.
This is a fatal.
How is that? you may say. It went from 8.2 percent in 1984 to 61.8 percent now. The difference is 53.6 percent!
That's because the difference in percentage points is 53.6 percent. But the difference in percentage growth is actually 653.6 percent!
Here's what I mean:
In 1984, 8.2 percent of 100 percent households had computers. If 100 percent is 113.1 million households, that means 8.2 percent is around 9.2 million households.
Today, 61.8 percent of that 113.1 million households have computers. 61.8 percent of 113.1 million is around 69.9 million.
So the percentage increase isn't 8.2 to 53.6; it's roughly 9.2 million to somewhere around 69.9 million. And that's an increase of over 650 percent. If the 9.2 million only went up just over 53 percent, we'd be talking about a total of around 14 million or so.
What I think you meant to say was that the percentage of households with computers has risen 53.67 percentage points. Which it did. But that's not what you said.
If you're not sure, check with your sources to make sure your math is correct and in proper context.
Now, I understand math is hard. That's why many of us went into writing; to get away from math, right?
Still, we have to know how to accurately calculate percentage change, and these day it's never been easier with the Internet. Just do a Google search for "percentage change calculator" and you'll find dozens. That's how I did my math.
By the way, this isn't an isolated mistake. In my class last semester someone made the exact same mistake as you did here. So did someone the semester before that. And the one before that. Seriously. Every. Single. Semester!
So don't fret. Do work on remembering the lesson, and not repeating the mistake.
For example, let's look at this passage:
The U.S. Census Bureau ... (found) 61.8 percent have computers, an increase of almost 54 percent since 1984.
This is a fatal.
How is that? you may say. It went from 8.2 percent in 1984 to 61.8 percent now. The difference is 53.6 percent!
That's because the difference in percentage points is 53.6 percent. But the difference in percentage growth is actually 653.6 percent!
Here's what I mean:
In 1984, 8.2 percent of 100 percent households had computers. If 100 percent is 113.1 million households, that means 8.2 percent is around 9.2 million households.
Today, 61.8 percent of that 113.1 million households have computers. 61.8 percent of 113.1 million is around 69.9 million.
So the percentage increase isn't 8.2 to 53.6; it's roughly 9.2 million to somewhere around 69.9 million. And that's an increase of over 650 percent. If the 9.2 million only went up just over 53 percent, we'd be talking about a total of around 14 million or so.
What I think you meant to say was that the percentage of households with computers has risen 53.67 percentage points. Which it did. But that's not what you said.
If you're not sure, check with your sources to make sure your math is correct and in proper context.
Now, I understand math is hard. That's why many of us went into writing; to get away from math, right?
Still, we have to know how to accurately calculate percentage change, and these day it's never been easier with the Internet. Just do a Google search for "percentage change calculator" and you'll find dozens. That's how I did my math.
By the way, this isn't an isolated mistake. In my class last semester someone made the exact same mistake as you did here. So did someone the semester before that. And the one before that. Seriously. Every. Single. Semester!
So don't fret. Do work on remembering the lesson, and not repeating the mistake.
Stats: Attribution
How do you know that 62 percent of 113.1 million American households have one or more computers?
Did you go door-to-door to those millions of households, and find out yourself?
No. You know that because the U.S. Census Bureau told you, via the press release and stats from which you wrote the story.
So, let's attribute it like this: Today, around 62 percent of 113.1 million American households have one or more computers, the U.S. Census Bureau said, or this: according to data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau, or this on second reference: the bureau said, or another way to do second reference: according to bureau data.
For your article to be credible, the audience needs to know from where you got your data. Was it yourself? A credible source? A crappy source?
In this case, it was the government agency that exists solely to statistically track Americans. That's source credibility you want to share with your audience to build your credibility: you're getting your info form the experts.
If the information isn't from your very own first-hand observation, then you must attribute the source.
Did you go door-to-door to those millions of households, and find out yourself?
No. You know that because the U.S. Census Bureau told you, via the press release and stats from which you wrote the story.
So, let's attribute it like this: Today, around 62 percent of 113.1 million American households have one or more computers, the U.S. Census Bureau said, or this: according to data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau, or this on second reference: the bureau said, or another way to do second reference: according to bureau data.
For your article to be credible, the audience needs to know from where you got your data. Was it yourself? A credible source? A crappy source?
In this case, it was the government agency that exists solely to statistically track Americans. That's source credibility you want to share with your audience to build your credibility: you're getting your info form the experts.
If the information isn't from your very own first-hand observation, then you must attribute the source.
Stats: Some Good Examples
First up: a good lede, good nut graf, good attribution, good sequence of supporting info; just good.
A survey done by the U.S. Census
Bureau last October reveals that computer and Internet use have increased
dramatically since the 1980s, according to a press release from the bureau.
In the year 1984, according to
the survey, only 8.2 percent of American households reported to the bureau that
they owned computers, and household Internet use was nonexistent.
Today, almost
62 percent of households own computers, and almost 55 percent of those households
have Internet access, the survey said.
After incremental growths in
computer ownership — 15 percent of households in 1989 and 22.8 percent in 1993
— the survey said household Internet use began to register at 18 percent of computer-owning
households in 1997, with 36.6 percent of households owning computers.
“About half of all children ages
3 to 17 had access to a computer at home by 1997, as did about 40 percent of
all adults (ages 18+),” said the census bureau.
Currently, 76
percent of children have access to a computer at home, as do 57 percent of all
adults, the bureau said.
Of the roughly 38 percent of
households that don’t have a computer, nearly 2 percent use the Internet
outside of home, according to the survey.
Of the roughly 45 percent that don’t access
the Internet, 26 percent say they have no computer, or that their computer was
inadequate, the survey said.
Households lacking access
include those that have computers, but no connection to an Internet service
provider, the primary reason being that the householders feel they don’t need
the Internet or have no interest in it (41 percent of respondents without
access), according to the survey.
Nearly 22 percent of respondents without access listed the price of Internet as their reason, the survey said.
*****
Now, here's one that found a more detailed hook for the lede:
*****
Now, here's one that found a more detailed hook for the lede:
*****
Today, more than 76 percent of children
from ages 3 to 17 have access to a computer, according to the Current
Population Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau in October.
This
is a dramatic change from when personal computer usage first began in households
in 1984. Then, only 8.2 percent of households reported that they owned a
household computer, according to the census bureau.
Household
Internet usage has remained a little below that of household computer usage,
according to the census bureau.
In
1984, Internet usage was non-existent, according to the census bureau.
In
1997, when more than 36 percent of households owned computers, 18 percent of
those were accessing the Internet, according to the census bureau.
Today,
when nearly 62 percents of households own computers, nearly 55 percent of them
are able to access the Internet, according to the census bureau.
Where
households did not own a computer, only two percent of them reported that they
accessed the Internet outside of the home, according to the census bureau.
Over
45 percent of households still do not access the Internet, including some that
own household computers, according to the census bureau.
Of
these households, 22 percent found the cost of Internet prohibitive, while 41
percent were not interested in accessing the Internet at all, according to the
census bureau.
Stats: A Good Alternate Lede
I've
been very focused on you all doing basic journalism: a to-the-point
lede, a strong nut graf, frequent attribution, and so forth.
But
the goal isn't to write basic stories with basic ledes; it's to use the
qualities of structure, simple and direct language, attribution and
such to then reinstall creativity to our writing, so that we have
something that is both fun to read AND fun to write; something that is
engaging in style yet solid in journalistic principles.
I
think this story -- and its alternate lede that stretches over the
first four sentences/paragraphs -- does a good job of
marrying fundamentals and a fun-to-read style. Note how it's not
creativity for creativity's sake; it's an artistic style entirely rooted
in the facts you're trying to emphasize. And it's followed by a nut
graf (in the fifth sentence/graf) that sounds like a basic lede, but
strongly supports the alternative telling:
It’s
the device that changed the lives of many people.
It has become the go-to for information
regarding the news, weather, research, latest celebrity gossip and much, much
more.
What is it?
It’s the computer.
There has been a dramatic growth of
computer ownership and Internet use in American households from the early 1980s
until now, according to a survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau.
The U.S. Census Bureau conducted the
survey as part of the Current Population Survey (CPS) on household computer ownership
and Internet use by
Americans.
Americans.
The CPS is a large nationally
representative survey of approximately 50,000 households conducted each month
by the U.S. Census Bureau; this particular survey was conducted in October,
said the survey.
The survey shows that since the early
1980s when computers first entered households, the number of households owning
a computer has increased from 8.2 percent to 61.8 percent of 113.1 million
American households.
According to the survey, of the 61.8
percent of households with computers, 54.7 percent access the Internet from
home.
“Today, more than 76 percent of children
ages 3 to 17 have access to a computer, as do 57 percent of all adults ages
18+,” said the survey.
Although computers and the Internet are
becoming popular in the majority of American households, they aren’t for
everyone.
According to the survey, of the 45.3
percent of households that don’t access the Internet but have computers, have a
variety of reasons given for not connecting to the Internet.
A few main reasons given were having
computers that are inadequate to access the Internet, people who felt they
don’t need the Internet or weren’t interested in it, and the cost of the
Internet was too high, said the survey.
The survey also said that many people
don’t access the Internet because of a lack of time, lack of skill, language
barriers, privacy and security concerns, and concerns about children accessing
questionable material on the Internet.
Stats: Flip That Lede
Some of you had good ledes that would have been great ledes if you
flipped the lede; that is, switch positioning of attribution and
substance to highlight the latter.
Here's one lede that could have used a flip:
According to the Current Population Survey conducted each month by the United States Census Bureau, Internet use among households is common in over half of all American homes.
Nice lede, but see how it starts with the attribution before getting to the gist of the story? You can reverse that order like this ...
Internet use among households is common in over half of all American homes, according to the Current Population Survey conducted each month by the United States Census Bureau.
... and you emphasize what is being said over who is saying it. Please note in this case I did not change, add or eliminate any word you used in your lede.
I simply flipped the order.
Here's one lede that could have used a flip:
According to the Current Population Survey conducted each month by the United States Census Bureau, Internet use among households is common in over half of all American homes.
Nice lede, but see how it starts with the attribution before getting to the gist of the story? You can reverse that order like this ...
Internet use among households is common in over half of all American homes, according to the Current Population Survey conducted each month by the United States Census Bureau.
... and you emphasize what is being said over who is saying it. Please note in this case I did not change, add or eliminate any word you used in your lede.
I simply flipped the order.
Stats: A Lot Of Youze Guyz ...
... were thrown off by the press release starting so heavily with
background about the survey before moving on to what the survey found.
That led many of you to offer generic background on the survey -- it's been conducted since 1942, it polls 50,000 households, ect. -- ahead of what the survey found regarding Internet use -- most households now use computers, and the number has drastically grown over the past few decades.
And it led some of you to lede with the fact a survey was taken, rather than what the survey discovered!
All because something is first in a press release -- or a city council meeting, or a football game -- doesn't mean it's worth prominent mention or a lede.
Your lede is based on the Peanut Barrel values we've discussed all semester (and in that case, it's not, Hey! A survey was taken! right?) and where you rank information is based on most relevant to least relevant, and not necessarily the order in which things were presented.
Don't fall for the sequence trap. Rank information on value to the reader and support for your story's central premise.
That led many of you to offer generic background on the survey -- it's been conducted since 1942, it polls 50,000 households, ect. -- ahead of what the survey found regarding Internet use -- most households now use computers, and the number has drastically grown over the past few decades.
And it led some of you to lede with the fact a survey was taken, rather than what the survey discovered!
All because something is first in a press release -- or a city council meeting, or a football game -- doesn't mean it's worth prominent mention or a lede.
Your lede is based on the Peanut Barrel values we've discussed all semester (and in that case, it's not, Hey! A survey was taken! right?) and where you rank information is based on most relevant to least relevant, and not necessarily the order in which things were presented.
Don't fall for the sequence trap. Rank information on value to the reader and support for your story's central premise.
Stats: Writing With (AP) Style
Is it internet with a little i, or Internet with a capital I?
It's Internet, with a capital I.
Some of you may have missed that because the listing in AP Style for Internet doesn't say in the text to capitalize it. But in the heading and throughout the definition Internet is indeed capitalized.
The headings for each listing is more than a heading; it also shows the form in which the term is supposed to be used. Things that are lower-cased like international date line are listed as such, in lower case. Things that are usually capitalized are also listed as such, like Internet.
Also, one of the oldest AP Style rules we have around here is that you spell out percent instead of using the percent symbol. No excuse for not knowing that by now. Yet, some of us are still repeating that mistake.
Plus, remember that in first references you should use a full title in caps, like the U.S. Census Bureau. But subsequent references should use the generic title in lower-case, like the census bureau.
Let's get these loose ends tied up, okay?
It's Internet, with a capital I.
Some of you may have missed that because the listing in AP Style for Internet doesn't say in the text to capitalize it. But in the heading and throughout the definition Internet is indeed capitalized.
The headings for each listing is more than a heading; it also shows the form in which the term is supposed to be used. Things that are lower-cased like international date line are listed as such, in lower case. Things that are usually capitalized are also listed as such, like Internet.
Also, one of the oldest AP Style rules we have around here is that you spell out percent instead of using the percent symbol. No excuse for not knowing that by now. Yet, some of us are still repeating that mistake.
Plus, remember that in first references you should use a full title in caps, like the U.S. Census Bureau. But subsequent references should use the generic title in lower-case, like the census bureau.
Let's get these loose ends tied up, okay?
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Lawsuit: A Good Example
Consistent attribution, consistent use of allegedly and a lede that zeroes in on the main point:
-->
-->
Two parents are suing the Kennedy High School principal,
superintendent, and East Lansing School District for $500,000 in Ingham County Circuit Court.
Parents Thaddeus and Laura Dowdell allege that their son
James Dowdell has not learned enough to be graduated from high school and that
this is the failure of Principal Marvin Ferrell, Superintendent Greg Hubbard
and the school district.
James Dowdell, who has attended Kennedy High School for the
past three years, has allegedly been told that he will graduate from the school
on or around the beginning of next June, according to the lawsuit.
The problem is that James Dowdell’s parents allege that he
can barely read or do simple arithmetic and has not learned enough to be
graduated from high school or to successfully function in a society as complex
as ours, according to the lawsuit.
Thaddeus and Laura Dowdell allege that the fault does not
lie with son James, who according to tests administered by guidance counselors
at Kennedy High School has an average IQ of 94, according to
the lawsuit.
The Dowdells allege that it is the failure of the defendants to employ competent teachers,
to maintain discipline, to provide remedial help and to provide an atmosphere
in which learning might take place, according to the lawsuit.
Along
with $500,000 in compensatory damages, the Dowdells are also demanding
that James Dowdell be retained at the high school until he further
masters the skills expected of
a high school graduate, according to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs are
also demanding a trial by jury, according to the lawsuit.
Lawsuit: Allegedly
Like we've discussed before, in a lawsuit anyone can allege anything. So it's extra-important to note things are alleged.
The district didn't fail to adequately educate James Dowdell. They allegedly failed to adequately educate Dowdell. We won't know whether that's true or not until the trial takes place and evidence is presented.
Also, what is being alleged is what, specifically, is being said; not that something is being said.
What I mean is, it's not that the Dowdells allegedly said their child received an insufficient education; that is what they said. What is being alleged is the substance of the claim, so better placement of allegedly would be, the Dowdells said their child allegedly received an insufficient education.
The district didn't fail to adequately educate James Dowdell. They allegedly failed to adequately educate Dowdell. We won't know whether that's true or not until the trial takes place and evidence is presented.
Also, what is being alleged is what, specifically, is being said; not that something is being said.
What I mean is, it's not that the Dowdells allegedly said their child received an insufficient education; that is what they said. What is being alleged is the substance of the claim, so better placement of allegedly would be, the Dowdells said their child allegedly received an insufficient education.
Lawsuit: Plurals Vs. Possessives
When you are talking about the Dowdells as a family unit, it's plural, as in Dowdells; e.g., the Dowdells demand a jury trial.
When you are talking about a single Dowdell in the possessive form, then it's Dowdell's; e.g., Dowdell's IQ score was 94.
When you are talking about a group of Dowdells in the possessive, then it's Dowdells'; e.g., the Dowdells' lawsuit.
When you are talking about a single Dowdell in the possessive form, then it's Dowdell's; e.g., Dowdell's IQ score was 94.
When you are talking about a group of Dowdells in the possessive, then it's Dowdells'; e.g., the Dowdells' lawsuit.
Lawsuit: Legal B.S.
Did you need to say the Dowdells demand a jury trial of all issues triable as of a right by jury?
What the hell does that mean, anyway?
It just means they are asking for a jury trial. So it would have been enough to say the Dowdells demanded a jury trial.
Likewise, did you need to say the lawsuit targeted both the defendants jointly and severally, for the compensatory damages in the amount of $500,000?
No. More legal B.S. You could just say the lawsuit targeted the defendants for $500,000.
Now, I didn't knock your grade for your inability to navigate legal mumbo-jumbo, unless it changed the meaning of things. This is the sort of stuff you'll get the hang of when you actually start covering court cases.
Still, if you're not sure of the meaning of what you're writing, you should ask a source for a layman's translation.
What the hell does that mean, anyway?
It just means they are asking for a jury trial. So it would have been enough to say the Dowdells demanded a jury trial.
Likewise, did you need to say the lawsuit targeted both the defendants jointly and severally, for the compensatory damages in the amount of $500,000?
No. More legal B.S. You could just say the lawsuit targeted the defendants for $500,000.
Now, I didn't knock your grade for your inability to navigate legal mumbo-jumbo, unless it changed the meaning of things. This is the sort of stuff you'll get the hang of when you actually start covering court cases.
Still, if you're not sure of the meaning of what you're writing, you should ask a source for a layman's translation.
Lawsuit: Writing With (AP) Style
On second reference, should James Dowdell be James Dowdell or just Dowdell or just James?
For this story, it should be James Dowdell, using both his first and last names on most references.
Now, normally under AP style rules we use just the last name on second reference. But there's an exception. In AP Style, under names:
When it is necessary to distinguish between two people who use the same last name, as in married couples or brothers and sisters, use the first and last name.
In this case, since we were writing about a lawsuit filed on his behalf by his parents, and since we used the last name of his parents, and since that last name is the same as his, then we would default to that exception.
For this story, it should be James Dowdell, using both his first and last names on most references.
Now, normally under AP style rules we use just the last name on second reference. But there's an exception. In AP Style, under names:
When it is necessary to distinguish between two people who use the same last name, as in married couples or brothers and sisters, use the first and last name.
In this case, since we were writing about a lawsuit filed on his behalf by his parents, and since we used the last name of his parents, and since that last name is the same as his, then we would default to that exception.
Rescue/Lawsuit/Stats: Fatals Flare-Ups ...
... included ...
>>> Incorrectly identifying the victim as Roger Lo, when it was James Roger Lo, or just James Lo.
>>> Incorrectly identifying the victim's mother as Joan Roger Lo, when it was just Joan Lo. The victim's father was Roger Lo.
>>> Incorrectly naming the property owner as Wagner Development Corp. or Magnor Development Corp., when it was Wagnor Development Corp.
>>> Spelling the plaintiffs' last name two different ways, as Dowdell and Dowell.
>>> Incorrectly citing numbers, like that 54.7 American households had Internet service, when we meant 54.7 percent of American households had Internet service.
And that the survey polled 500,000 households, when in fact it was 50,000. Yep, one zero makes all the difference.
The lesson? Same as usual. Make sure we correctly cite spellings of names and the accuracy of numbers before we start writing, and after we finish make sure what we wrote checks out with what we intended to write. Go through your work and make sure you used the same names the same way, and look for inconsistencies.
One more time: journalism isn't about writing; it's about getting it right.
For those of you keeping count, 15 of 18 people in this class have now fact-fataled. Membership cards for the Fatals Club coming soon.
>>> Incorrectly identifying the victim as Roger Lo, when it was James Roger Lo, or just James Lo.
>>> Incorrectly identifying the victim's mother as Joan Roger Lo, when it was just Joan Lo. The victim's father was Roger Lo.
>>> Incorrectly naming the property owner as Wagner Development Corp. or Magnor Development Corp., when it was Wagnor Development Corp.
>>> Spelling the plaintiffs' last name two different ways, as Dowdell and Dowell.
>>> Incorrectly citing numbers, like that 54.7 American households had Internet service, when we meant 54.7 percent of American households had Internet service.
And that the survey polled 500,000 households, when in fact it was 50,000. Yep, one zero makes all the difference.
The lesson? Same as usual. Make sure we correctly cite spellings of names and the accuracy of numbers before we start writing, and after we finish make sure what we wrote checks out with what we intended to write. Go through your work and make sure you used the same names the same way, and look for inconsistencies.
One more time: journalism isn't about writing; it's about getting it right.
For those of you keeping count, 15 of 18 people in this class have now fact-fataled. Membership cards for the Fatals Club coming soon.
Monday, October 28, 2013
JRN 200: Getting Your Out-Of-Class Story Published
Now that you've done a genuinely-reported real story, let's take the next step and get your work published.
In this class, if you get an out-of-class story published by any existing campus or local media, and if you email me a link proving that you've been published, then per the syllabus your final class grade will go up by 0.15 points for every published story.
That means if you get all three published, your 3.5 final grade would turn into a 4.0.
The benefit to you is two-fold: first, you get a better grade. Duh.
Second -- and probably more important to your long-term prospects -- you start building a portfolio. This is very much a field of demonstrated ability; that is, an employer doesn't want to see that you're capable of doing something; they want to see that you've already done it.
Like, write a real story and get it published.
Plus, then you get to add to your resume a line that you worked as a free-lance contributor to whatever publication in the fall of 2013. Even if you get just one story published, that is an accurate line in your resume.
So, where do you get your work published?
Not The State News. Sorry, folks. The paper doesn't take free-lance news submissions. But there are several online campus news organizations that do consider such work -- and which have historically published JRN 200 stories -- including:
Spartan Edge, at spartanedge.com
The Big Green, at thebiggreen.net
Uloop, at msu.uloop.com/main/
People have also had luck at other student-run and professionally-run news organizations. In the past, I've had a few people have luck in getting their hometown newspaper to run their stories, especially if the topic related to issues in their hometowns. I can think of a couple of times where the MSU Greek community newspaper, the Odyssey, did publish JRN 200 work.
So, let's try to contact some media organizations and get you officially stamped as a published journalist. If you need some help in brainstorming where to try and get published, please see me during my office hours.
FYI, as of now we have one story published. Here it is.
In this class, if you get an out-of-class story published by any existing campus or local media, and if you email me a link proving that you've been published, then per the syllabus your final class grade will go up by 0.15 points for every published story.
That means if you get all three published, your 3.5 final grade would turn into a 4.0.
The benefit to you is two-fold: first, you get a better grade. Duh.
Second -- and probably more important to your long-term prospects -- you start building a portfolio. This is very much a field of demonstrated ability; that is, an employer doesn't want to see that you're capable of doing something; they want to see that you've already done it.
Like, write a real story and get it published.
Plus, then you get to add to your resume a line that you worked as a free-lance contributor to whatever publication in the fall of 2013. Even if you get just one story published, that is an accurate line in your resume.
So, where do you get your work published?
Not The State News. Sorry, folks. The paper doesn't take free-lance news submissions. But there are several online campus news organizations that do consider such work -- and which have historically published JRN 200 stories -- including:
Spartan Edge, at spartanedge.com
The Big Green, at thebiggreen.net
Uloop, at msu.uloop.com/main/
People have also had luck at other student-run and professionally-run news organizations. In the past, I've had a few people have luck in getting their hometown newspaper to run their stories, especially if the topic related to issues in their hometowns. I can think of a couple of times where the MSU Greek community newspaper, the Odyssey, did publish JRN 200 work.
So, let's try to contact some media organizations and get you officially stamped as a published journalist. If you need some help in brainstorming where to try and get published, please see me during my office hours.
FYI, as of now we have one story published. Here it is.
Rescue: A Few Good Examples ...
... of doing this story well. First, this one:
Lo was freed at 5:24 p.m., taken
to East Lansing Regional Medical Center, and pronounced dead there from
extensive lack of oxygen, the report said.
Play fort-building with friends ended tragically yesterday at 4:40 p.m., after a tunnel four boys
were digging suddenly collapsed and only three made it out alive.
The victim has been identified as 11-year-old James Roger Lo
after officers responded to a call at the west end of Liberty Avenue, located on the property of the Wagnor
Development Corporation, according to an East Lansing Fire Department incident
report.
After the tunnel collapsed, witnesses at the scene said one
boy ran for help while the others tried to free Lo from the dirt, according to
the report.
The report said when the fire department arrived on the
scene there were approximately 20 adults trying to remove the boy with their
hands and shovels. The boy had been
submerged for 12 minutes at this point, the report said.
According to the report, the rescue was challenging as the
walls of the tunnel continued to cave in with digging efforts.
When Lo’s head was
exposed from the dirt medics rushed to begin resuscitation efforts, however
another collapse occurred before they were able to make any progress, the
report said.
The fire department was unable to use heavy equipment so as
not to further injure the victim, the report said.
The report said the body was recovered six feet from the
opening of the tunnel at 5:24 p.m. and was taken to the Regional Medical Center
where he was pronounced dead from an extensive lack of oxygen.
Neighbors and witnesses were angry and said they had
expressed to the property owner many times that the area was dangerous and
needed a fence around the pond so the
neighborhood children could not have access to the land, according to the
report.
The report said the homeowner should be contacted as they
may file a claim or have to be compensated for fence repairs.
*****
Next up is this one:
An 11-year-old East Lansing boy died yesterday evening
after a tunnel he was digging with his friends collapsed on him.
James Roger Lo, a student at
Lincoln Elementary School, and three of his friends were digging into the side
of a hill near the pond on the west end of Liberty Avenue when, at 4:40 p.m., the
tunnel collapsed, according to an incident report filed by Lt. Steven Chenn.
Also according to the report,
the East Lansing Fire Department arrived onto the scene at 4:52 p.m., with some
20 adults already there, digging with their hands and a few shovels.
The bystanders expressed their
anger at the property owner, Wagnor Development Corporation, for inaction on
various warnings that the pond area was a popular but dangerous play area for
children, according to the report.
Firefighters took over the work and
manage to expose the boy’s head within ten minutes, but another collapse
prevented medics from initiating resuscitation, the report said.
Heavy equipment was ruled out,
as firefighters had to be careful not to further injure Lo, according to the
report.
To expedite the rescue, the report said, firefighters tore sections
from a fence at a nearby residence and used it as makeshift shoring to hold
back the continually-collapsing dirt.
Rescue: Was It ...
. . . a fort the kids were building? You know, with gates and turrets and moats and solid stone walls and stuff?
Or a tunnel that was a kind of play-fort?
It's the former, right?
So, why just call it a fort when it was really a tunnel?
It's not wrong that you refer to the fort in some way; just make sure the context is correct. One of you found a great way to say it: the boys were digging a tunnel to create a play fort.
Or a tunnel that was a kind of play-fort?
It's the former, right?
So, why just call it a fort when it was really a tunnel?
It's not wrong that you refer to the fort in some way; just make sure the context is correct. One of you found a great way to say it: the boys were digging a tunnel to create a play fort.
Rescue: Who, What, WHEN, Where, Why
Quite a few of us never said what time the collapse took place. Even
more of us never said when the boy was pulled out of the tunnel, and
at what time the boy died.
Time often matters as one of the five W's. But in this case, it's especially important to the telling of the story.
Time tells you how difficult it would have been for the boy to be okay after being buried for so long. Time tells you how difficult it was to dig out the boy, in that it took so long.
In this case, specific times are important bits of data that help show the reader what happened, and not just leave them being told by you.
You say it was a difficult rescue. The times help readers see that.
In every story you write, try to determine which data sets help explain the story and show readers what they need to see in terms of evidence supporting your overall angle.
Time often matters as one of the five W's. But in this case, it's especially important to the telling of the story.
Time tells you how difficult it would have been for the boy to be okay after being buried for so long. Time tells you how difficult it was to dig out the boy, in that it took so long.
In this case, specific times are important bits of data that help show the reader what happened, and not just leave them being told by you.
You say it was a difficult rescue. The times help readers see that.
In every story you write, try to determine which data sets help explain the story and show readers what they need to see in terms of evidence supporting your overall angle.
Rescue: Why Did Some Of Us ...
. . . forget to make any mention that the city's zoning board was to be
notified about the site's hazard to children, as indicated at the end
of the report?
Isn't that an important detail relating to where the story may go from here, and detailing consequence for what happened?
Also, some of you referred to the site owner generically, but you never named the company directly. Why is that? Isn't that specific and useful information? Wouldn't readers want to know who owns the land, in the same way they want to know who died? Isn't who one of the five W's every story should have?
Finally, if this was a real story you were doing for a real news organization, what would have been some additional steps in reporting this story? Let's get some good answers.
Isn't that an important detail relating to where the story may go from here, and detailing consequence for what happened?
Also, some of you referred to the site owner generically, but you never named the company directly. Why is that? Isn't that specific and useful information? Wouldn't readers want to know who owns the land, in the same way they want to know who died? Isn't who one of the five W's every story should have?
Finally, if this was a real story you were doing for a real news organization, what would have been some additional steps in reporting this story? Let's get some good answers.
Rescue: Writing With (AP) Style
When do you spell out avenue and street, and when do you abbreviate it?
In AP Style under addresses, it says to abbreviate when used with a specific street number, like 8397 Liberty Ave.
But when using just the street name without a number, it's spelled out, like Liberty Avenue.
Also, the abbreviation for avenue is Ave., and not Av. I know the latter was what was in the report, but we are supposed to translate anything outside of quotations to conform with AP Style.
Elsewhere in AP Style, we had issues with whether to spell out numerals, or use digits instead. We had issues on whether to use just the first name, just the last name or a person's full name on second references. We had issues on how to properly list ages.
I'm not going to revisit these here, since we've gone over these instances in multiple previous AP Style blogs. But I do ask that you review EVERY AP Style blog post from the semester, and find the answers yourself.
It's easy to find every AP Style post. Just click on the label below this post that reads, "ap style," and all the posts will chain together.
Every blog post has labels describing its topic area, and clicking on any of those labels will bring up every similarly-labeled item we've done, period. Please use that as a short-cut resource if there are subject areas in which you'd like a refresher.
In AP Style under addresses, it says to abbreviate when used with a specific street number, like 8397 Liberty Ave.
But when using just the street name without a number, it's spelled out, like Liberty Avenue.
Also, the abbreviation for avenue is Ave., and not Av. I know the latter was what was in the report, but we are supposed to translate anything outside of quotations to conform with AP Style.
Elsewhere in AP Style, we had issues with whether to spell out numerals, or use digits instead. We had issues on whether to use just the first name, just the last name or a person's full name on second references. We had issues on how to properly list ages.
I'm not going to revisit these here, since we've gone over these instances in multiple previous AP Style blogs. But I do ask that you review EVERY AP Style blog post from the semester, and find the answers yourself.
It's easy to find every AP Style post. Just click on the label below this post that reads, "ap style," and all the posts will chain together.
Every blog post has labels describing its topic area, and clicking on any of those labels will bring up every similarly-labeled item we've done, period. Please use that as a short-cut resource if there are subject areas in which you'd like a refresher.
Police: Some Good Examples
Note
a good lede that gets to what the latest news is, a strong nut graf
that sums up what happened that brought us to the point of the lede,
short paragraphs with each turn of events getting itss own graf, and
good and consistent attribution throughout:
One man is in police custody and another is on the loose
after the duo’s attempted robbery of a 24-hour convenience store went awry early
this morning.
Jiffy Foods employee Terry DaRoza managed to fend off two
men with nothing more than his cane after one of the men pulled a knife on him
in an attempt to rob the 24-hour convenience store in Okemos.
According to the Ingham County Sherriff’s Department’s
police report, DaRoza said the two men arrived at approximately 1:15 a.m. and
asked to use the restroom at the store, located at 4010 Holbrook Drive.
According to the
police report, DaRoza then went behind the counter to get the key to the
bathroom but was followed by one of the suspects, local resident Timothy Keel,
19, who then allegedly pulled out a knife.
DaRoza, who was still wearing a cast due to an injury he had
suffered recently, used his cane to bludgeon Keel, hitting him repeatedly in
the face, according to the police report.
The blows caused Keel to fall to the floor, which is when
the suspect still at large attempted to grab the cane from DaRoza, who
proceeded to beat him with it, causing the suspect to flee, according to the
police report.
A customer then entered and helped DaRoza tie Keel up using
their belts to secure him until police arrived, according to the police report.
Keel is now in police custody and is suffering from a broken
nose and jaw from the beating he took at the hands of DaRoza. Keel is being
charged with armed robbery and resisting a merchant, according to the police
report.
The police also said to be on the lookout for a brown, 1994,
two-door Toyota Celica which the second suspect fled in.
****
Here's another one worth reviewing:
****
Here's another one worth reviewing:
****
This morning a store clerk in Okemos apprehended
one of the men who tried to rob the 24-hour establishment.
Terry DaRoza a full-time clerk at the Jiffy
Foods, 4010 Holbrook Drive, subdued an armed assailant at approximately
1:15 this morning and with the help of a customer tied him up until police
arrived.
DaRoza stated that he was cleaning a popcorn
machine when two men entered Jiffy Foods around 1:15 a.m., according to an Ingham County Sheriff's Department report.
They asked to use the restroom, and when he went
to get the key from behind the counter one of the men allegedly pulled a knife, the report said.
The man who allegedly pulled the knife has been identified as Timothy Keel, the report said.
DaRoza uses a cane due to his leg being in a cast
from a recent injury he obtained at construction job accident, the report said
DaRoza said that he swung his cane multiple times
as hard as he could at Keel's face, according to the report.
Paramedics said that Keel's jaw, nose, and other
bones in his face were broken, according to the report.
At this time the unidentified second suspect
attempted to grab DaRoza's cane, at which point DaRoza began to hit the suspect
with his cane, the report said.
As the second suspect fled, Stuart Adler entered
Jiffy Foods and proceeded to help DaRoza bind Keel with their belts, the report said.
Officers from the Ingham County Sheriff's Department arrived on scene around 1:30 a.m., the report said.
DaRoza said he was not injured in the incident, according to the report.
Police: Peanut Barrel Rule
I'm kind of surprised that few of you cited something that to me
stood out like a sore thumb: the fact that the cane-wielding victim was
almost 6 1/2 feet tall, while the would-be alleged robber he beat was
fit but not much over five feet tall and weighed less than half as much as the
victim.
Isn't that a Peanut Barrel-type of item? Isn't that sharp contrast in size what takes an out-of-the-ordinary robbery story (unusual in that the victim beat off the attacker) and make it even more unique?
I'm not shocked that many of you didn't weave it into your ledes, because to do that is doable but a bit complex. I'm just surprised few few of you noted that bit of interest.
Any explanations?
As journalists, it's important that even when we are looking at what we think is a routine event, that we are always on the lookout for something that makes it a bit different and a bit more interesting. Even if that bit of interest is buried in the nuances of a police report.
Some of you did, however, note the victim's disability-turned-advantage. This lede did that, smartly:
A man with a cane should not be underestimated.
Isn't that a Peanut Barrel-type of item? Isn't that sharp contrast in size what takes an out-of-the-ordinary robbery story (unusual in that the victim beat off the attacker) and make it even more unique?
I'm not shocked that many of you didn't weave it into your ledes, because to do that is doable but a bit complex. I'm just surprised few few of you noted that bit of interest.
Any explanations?
As journalists, it's important that even when we are looking at what we think is a routine event, that we are always on the lookout for something that makes it a bit different and a bit more interesting. Even if that bit of interest is buried in the nuances of a police report.
Some of you did, however, note the victim's disability-turned-advantage. This lede did that, smartly:
A man with a cane should not be underestimated.
Police: Let's Look At Some Ledes
Let's look at some ledes; first, this one:
The Ingham County Sheriff's Office responded to an armed robbery around 1:30 a.m. today in Okemos.
It's factually correct, but does it go to end resul and ultimate outcome? No. It's like those hypothetical sports ledes we looked at earlier: MSU football played a game Saturday night. It doesn't say how things finished, or at least set context. And in journalism, we start with ending and/or context.
The end result was what transpired. This lede got there:
An attempted armed robbery occurred today in Okemos, resulting in one arrest.
That's better, but there's still something missing. It wasn't a routine armed robbery; I mean, the clerk captured one of the robbers. That's different, right? So, why not highlight what makes this different, like this:
A store clerk captured one of two men who attempted an armed robbery at a convenience store this morning, according to an Ingham County sheriff's report.
Now, the reader knows not just that something happened, but what happened and how it ended.
It's fair to say what made this story stand out from other armed robbery stories is that the victim caught the suspect. What made it stand out among stories where the victim caught the suspect is that the victim was lame. This lede captured that extra element:
An armed robbery attempt at Jiffy Foods, 4010 Holbrook Drive in Okemos, was foiled by a clerk who had recently been injured in a construction job.
Yet another lede developed that context -- a lame victim beating a robber -- a bit more. This more anecdotal lede is followed by a nut graf that helped zero in on the basic details of end result:
While many view being cane-dependent as a handicap, Jiffy Foods clerk Terry DaRoza saw it as an advantage that helped save his life in an armed robbery late last night.
DaRoza, recently injured in a construction job, had to resort to violence when two customers threatened him with a knife at the convenience store on Holbrook Drive at 1:15 a.m., according to an Ingham County Sheriff's report.
This lede/nut graf combo did an outstanding job of setting context and offering basic details. Look carefully at how the nut graf answers specific questions created by the lede; e.g., who was the clerk, who was the robber, how did he defend himself, where and when did this happen, ect.
An injured convenience store clerk used his cane in self-defense this morning when two armed men tried to rob Jiffy Foods, according to an Ingham County Sheriff's Department report.
At about 1:15 a.m., Terry DaRoza, 34, beat Timothy Keel with his cane after Keel allegedly pulled a knife on DaRoza at the store located at 4010 Holbrook Drive, the report said.
Then the story starts a chronological narrative. But the reader already known end result and context.
The Ingham County Sheriff's Office responded to an armed robbery around 1:30 a.m. today in Okemos.
It's factually correct, but does it go to end resul and ultimate outcome? No. It's like those hypothetical sports ledes we looked at earlier: MSU football played a game Saturday night. It doesn't say how things finished, or at least set context. And in journalism, we start with ending and/or context.
The end result was what transpired. This lede got there:
An attempted armed robbery occurred today in Okemos, resulting in one arrest.
That's better, but there's still something missing. It wasn't a routine armed robbery; I mean, the clerk captured one of the robbers. That's different, right? So, why not highlight what makes this different, like this:
A store clerk captured one of two men who attempted an armed robbery at a convenience store this morning, according to an Ingham County sheriff's report.
Now, the reader knows not just that something happened, but what happened and how it ended.
It's fair to say what made this story stand out from other armed robbery stories is that the victim caught the suspect. What made it stand out among stories where the victim caught the suspect is that the victim was lame. This lede captured that extra element:
An armed robbery attempt at Jiffy Foods, 4010 Holbrook Drive in Okemos, was foiled by a clerk who had recently been injured in a construction job.
Yet another lede developed that context -- a lame victim beating a robber -- a bit more. This more anecdotal lede is followed by a nut graf that helped zero in on the basic details of end result:
While many view being cane-dependent as a handicap, Jiffy Foods clerk Terry DaRoza saw it as an advantage that helped save his life in an armed robbery late last night.
DaRoza, recently injured in a construction job, had to resort to violence when two customers threatened him with a knife at the convenience store on Holbrook Drive at 1:15 a.m., according to an Ingham County Sheriff's report.
This lede/nut graf combo did an outstanding job of setting context and offering basic details. Look carefully at how the nut graf answers specific questions created by the lede; e.g., who was the clerk, who was the robber, how did he defend himself, where and when did this happen, ect.
An injured convenience store clerk used his cane in self-defense this morning when two armed men tried to rob Jiffy Foods, according to an Ingham County Sheriff's Department report.
At about 1:15 a.m., Terry DaRoza, 34, beat Timothy Keel with his cane after Keel allegedly pulled a knife on DaRoza at the store located at 4010 Holbrook Drive, the report said.
Then the story starts a chronological narrative. But the reader already known end result and context.
Police: Nut Grafs Are Driving You Nuts
One of youze did a nice alternate lede, but the nut graf fell a bit short. Here was the sequence:
One left in a jiffy. And the other? Not so much.
Jiffy Foods, located in Okemos, was the target of an attempted robbery by two men early this morning.
Then, you start with the chronological narrative of how things unfolded.
First off, the lede was cute and a great teasing set-up for the nut graf.
Now, the nut graf does half of what a good nut graf does, in expanding upon the lede. It says where they left, and what they were doing there.
But the nut graf falls short in another area, and that's answering critical questions created by the lede. Like, why did the one guy stay? And why did the other guy leave in a jiffy? Those question was central to your lede, and you leave the reader still guessing after the nut graf.
I mean, after reading the lede and nut graf, the reader is left guessing what we meant with the whole jiffy/not so much thing. And we can't leave them hanging like that.
A better nut graf would say something like this:
Two men walked into Jiffy Foods in Okemos as part of an alleged armed robbery attempt, but only one of the suspects was able to flee after the other was beaten by a clerk wielding a cane.
Now, we can go on to the narrative, because the reader knows what the lede meant.
Be sure that you carefully look at your lede, and think about what people need to immediately know for that lede to make sense if they don't read anything other than the lede and nut graf. What they need to know goes in your nut graf.
One left in a jiffy. And the other? Not so much.
Jiffy Foods, located in Okemos, was the target of an attempted robbery by two men early this morning.
Then, you start with the chronological narrative of how things unfolded.
First off, the lede was cute and a great teasing set-up for the nut graf.
Now, the nut graf does half of what a good nut graf does, in expanding upon the lede. It says where they left, and what they were doing there.
But the nut graf falls short in another area, and that's answering critical questions created by the lede. Like, why did the one guy stay? And why did the other guy leave in a jiffy? Those question was central to your lede, and you leave the reader still guessing after the nut graf.
I mean, after reading the lede and nut graf, the reader is left guessing what we meant with the whole jiffy/not so much thing. And we can't leave them hanging like that.
A better nut graf would say something like this:
Two men walked into Jiffy Foods in Okemos as part of an alleged armed robbery attempt, but only one of the suspects was able to flee after the other was beaten by a clerk wielding a cane.
Now, we can go on to the narrative, because the reader knows what the lede meant.
Be sure that you carefully look at your lede, and think about what people need to immediately know for that lede to make sense if they don't read anything other than the lede and nut graf. What they need to know goes in your nut graf.
Police: Allegedly!
Especially when reporting on crime and courts, it's hard to use the word allegedly enough. At the time accusations are made, they are alleged; that is, thaey have yet to be proven in a court of law.
So, it's important that we properly attribute things as being alleged.
For example, it's not alleged that Timothy Keel entered the store. He has a face full of broken bones proving he was there. And it's not a crime to get your ass kicked (though it may be a crime to do the ass-kicking).
What is alleged is whether he pulled a knife, and tried to commit a crime.
So, where does allegedly fit in here?
DaRoza walked behind the counter for the key to the restroom when Keel followed him and exposed a knife.
Before "exposed a knife," right? Like this:
DaRoza walked behind the counter for the key to the restroom when Keel followed him and allegedly exposed a knife.
When something is being alleged, do use allegedly. And when in doubt, be safe and use allegedly.
So, it's important that we properly attribute things as being alleged.
For example, it's not alleged that Timothy Keel entered the store. He has a face full of broken bones proving he was there. And it's not a crime to get your ass kicked (though it may be a crime to do the ass-kicking).
What is alleged is whether he pulled a knife, and tried to commit a crime.
So, where does allegedly fit in here?
DaRoza walked behind the counter for the key to the restroom when Keel followed him and exposed a knife.
Before "exposed a knife," right? Like this:
DaRoza walked behind the counter for the key to the restroom when Keel followed him and allegedly exposed a knife.
When something is being alleged, do use allegedly. And when in doubt, be safe and use allegedly.
Police: Who, What, When, WHERE, Why
In many of our stories we noted the store in question was in Okemos. That's good. It's key among the 5 W's: where.
But, a reader may ask, which store in Okemos? Is there just one? Is it the Jiffy Foods down the street?
So, as a secondary elaboration of location, it would have been nice to specify that by offering an address: 4010 Holbrook Drive.
It didn't need to be in the lede, or even the nut graf. But offering a specific like that is what the body of the story is for. The lede and nut graf sums things up, and the body offers a greater level of detail.
But, a reader may ask, which store in Okemos? Is there just one? Is it the Jiffy Foods down the street?
So, as a secondary elaboration of location, it would have been nice to specify that by offering an address: 4010 Holbrook Drive.
It didn't need to be in the lede, or even the nut graf. But offering a specific like that is what the body of the story is for. The lede and nut graf sums things up, and the body offers a greater level of detail.
Police: Writing With (AP) Style
Was the address of the store 4010 Holbrook Dr., or 4010 Holbrook Drive?
It's Drive, spelled out.
AP Style under addresses says to abbreviate avenue, boulevard and street when it's part of a specific address. But similar words like alley, drive, road and terrace are always spelled out, no matter what.
I know the report had drive abbreviated, but our job as journalists is to translate anything except direct citations and quotes into AP style.
Now, is it stupid that AP Style is being inconsistent on how to be consistent with addresses? I think so, absolutely.
But that doesn't matter, since AP Style is the standard by which most news organizations go when it comes to how they use facts and terms. So, we have to learn it for that practical reason: if we go into media, we'll have to know it. Even if some of it doesn't make sense.
Finally, I don't believe we're still on this,but ... the general AP Style number rule is that we spell out numbers from zero to nine (just like that, zero and nine, not 0 and 9) and that we use digits for 10 and above (just like that; 10, and not ten).
Next person who fails to adhere to the AP numbers rule, I chop off a finger.Yours, not mine. :)
It's Drive, spelled out.
AP Style under addresses says to abbreviate avenue, boulevard and street when it's part of a specific address. But similar words like alley, drive, road and terrace are always spelled out, no matter what.
I know the report had drive abbreviated, but our job as journalists is to translate anything except direct citations and quotes into AP style.
Now, is it stupid that AP Style is being inconsistent on how to be consistent with addresses? I think so, absolutely.
But that doesn't matter, since AP Style is the standard by which most news organizations go when it comes to how they use facts and terms. So, we have to learn it for that practical reason: if we go into media, we'll have to know it. Even if some of it doesn't make sense.
Finally, I don't believe we're still on this,but ... the general AP Style number rule is that we spell out numbers from zero to nine (just like that, zero and nine, not 0 and 9) and that we use digits for 10 and above (just like that; 10, and not ten).
Next person who fails to adhere to the AP numbers rule, I chop off a finger.Yours, not mine. :)
Police: A Fatal Investigation
Here's the rundown of what to do, and why:
>>> Double-check the spellings of names, like the last name of clerk DaRoza. One of us spelled it incorrectly, as DeRoza.
>>> Double-check the spellings of names, like the last name of clerk DaRoza. One of us spelled it incorrectly, as DeRoza.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Out-Of-Class #2: Some Of The Topics ...
... just in case you were curious:
How can someone avoid winter illnesses?
Do student sleep patterns affect classwork?
How is MSU spending its money?
Is music popularity based on trendiness or quality?
Is MSU prepared for a campus shooting?
Should the blood-alcohol limit for drivers be lowered?
Can public transportation help stem global warming?
How is the U.S.A. lowering harmful emissions?
How is social media affecting students?
How did "No-Shave November" begin and why is it trendy?
Is it a good idea for college students to adopt pets?
It's a good range of topics that go to trends and issues, rather than just covering a happening. And note how they seek to answer questions that are interesting/relevant/useful to the community.
Your due date is no later than 9 a.m. Monday, Nov. 4 to omars@msu.edu. That gives you almost two weeks to work on it. That's a very generous time allotment, as the syllabus notes you should usually have a one-week turn-around time.
Please don't wait to start on this; lining up sources and finding sources willing to be interviewed can take a lot more time than you'd expect. And with all the classes and activities and work you all have outside of class, you may not have a gazillion time windows in which to do interviews.
If you wait, you may miss opportunities to gain key interviews, and end up turning in a subpar product.
Please note the assignment parameters, as listed in your syllabus:
>>> The topic must be pre-approved by me, via tip sheet. If you have received an approval email from me, then you have been approved.
>>> The story must be at least 700 words long.
>>> You need to note the word count at the end of the story.
>>> The story should include at least three sources who you have personally interviewed. Three is the bare minimum, but I expect to see many more than that.
>>> You should try to incorporate at least one neutral expert.
>>> On a separate page, attach a source sheet where you list by name, title, phone number and email address each interview source you communicated with. I will be randomly spot-checking sources to check your accuracy and make sure you spoke to whom you claim to have spoken.
>>> Also, keep in mind you will have the opportunity to do an optional rewrite of your story, after the graded version is returned to you. To earn credit for a rewrite, you must do additional reporting and rewriting, as suggested by me. Then, your initial grade and rewrite grade are averaged, and that average becomes your final assignment grade.
I strongly suggest you take advantage of rewrite opportunities; first, because out-of-class stories are such a big part of your final grade (each one is around 12 percent of your final grade), any increase in grade is bound to make a difference. Second, the more you write and report, the better you get.
So, you get an opportunity for a higher grade, and I get the reassurance that you're taking more opportunities to refine your craft. Everyone wins.
Also, please don't forget that rewrites for the first out-of-class story are due no later than 9 a.m. Friday, Oct. 25 to omars@msu.edu. No exceptions.
Good luck, everybody!
How can someone avoid winter illnesses?
Do student sleep patterns affect classwork?
How is MSU spending its money?
Is music popularity based on trendiness or quality?
Is MSU prepared for a campus shooting?
Should the blood-alcohol limit for drivers be lowered?
Can public transportation help stem global warming?
How is the U.S.A. lowering harmful emissions?
How is social media affecting students?
How did "No-Shave November" begin and why is it trendy?
Is it a good idea for college students to adopt pets?
It's a good range of topics that go to trends and issues, rather than just covering a happening. And note how they seek to answer questions that are interesting/relevant/useful to the community.
Your due date is no later than 9 a.m. Monday, Nov. 4 to omars@msu.edu. That gives you almost two weeks to work on it. That's a very generous time allotment, as the syllabus notes you should usually have a one-week turn-around time.
Please don't wait to start on this; lining up sources and finding sources willing to be interviewed can take a lot more time than you'd expect. And with all the classes and activities and work you all have outside of class, you may not have a gazillion time windows in which to do interviews.
If you wait, you may miss opportunities to gain key interviews, and end up turning in a subpar product.
Please note the assignment parameters, as listed in your syllabus:
>>> The topic must be pre-approved by me, via tip sheet. If you have received an approval email from me, then you have been approved.
>>> The story must be at least 700 words long.
>>> You need to note the word count at the end of the story.
>>> The story should include at least three sources who you have personally interviewed. Three is the bare minimum, but I expect to see many more than that.
>>> You should try to incorporate at least one neutral expert.
>>> On a separate page, attach a source sheet where you list by name, title, phone number and email address each interview source you communicated with. I will be randomly spot-checking sources to check your accuracy and make sure you spoke to whom you claim to have spoken.
>>> Also, keep in mind you will have the opportunity to do an optional rewrite of your story, after the graded version is returned to you. To earn credit for a rewrite, you must do additional reporting and rewriting, as suggested by me. Then, your initial grade and rewrite grade are averaged, and that average becomes your final assignment grade.
I strongly suggest you take advantage of rewrite opportunities; first, because out-of-class stories are such a big part of your final grade (each one is around 12 percent of your final grade), any increase in grade is bound to make a difference. Second, the more you write and report, the better you get.
So, you get an opportunity for a higher grade, and I get the reassurance that you're taking more opportunities to refine your craft. Everyone wins.
Also, please don't forget that rewrites for the first out-of-class story are due no later than 9 a.m. Friday, Oct. 25 to omars@msu.edu. No exceptions.
Good luck, everybody!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)