I'm afraid this lede falls short in that regard:
On Friday, researchers from the Centers for Disease
Control released their results on American marriage based on a study of 50,000
women, providing possible explanation for the high divorce rate in the U.S.
The
lede says what took place -- a study -- but it fails to say what the
study found. The news isn't that results were released; it's what the
results were. The news isn't that the results provide a possible explanation; it's what the explanation is.
With
this lede, the reader has no idea what makes this newsworthy. In many
ways, this lede is like a football game lede that says ...
On Friday, the MSU football ream played Notre Dame.
...
which, obviously, we'd never do. The news is who won the game, by how
much, ect. A better lede would incorporate those elements, like this:
On Friday, MSU's football team beat Notre Dame, 152-0.
So, we need to do the same thing with our research lede: incorporate the end results. So, instead of saying they released their results on American marriage based on a study of 50,000 women, let's say what some key results of that study were, like, people who are younger, less religious and live together before marriage are at greater risk for divorce.
Let's swap out those phrases, and we have a lede like this:
On Friday, researchers from the Centers for Disease
Control said
people who are younger, less religious and live together before
marriage are at greater risk for divorce, providing possible explanation
for the high divorce rate in the U.S.
Now, we have a solid idea of exactly what the study found; not just that there was a study that found something.
Let's make sure our ledes get to that end result and ultimate outcome, just like a sports story would.
No comments:
Post a Comment