There are three types of quotations. The first is known as a direct quotation. That is a source's exact words, set inside quotation marks. For example:
Tom Izzo tells Omar Sofradzija, "You are a God-awful teacher." So, a direct quote of this would be, "You are a God-awful teacher," Tom Izzo said. Please note what is being said is EXACTLY what the speaker said, and the saying is entirely inside of quotation marks.
The second is an indirect quotation, also known as a paraphrase. This is when the writer summarizes or paraphrases a source's words. A paraphrase is NOT placed inside of quotation marks. For example:
Tom Izzo tells Omar Sofradzija, "You are a God-awful teacher." So, an indirect quotation/paraphrase could be, Tom Izzo was critical of Omar Sofradzija's teaching skills. Please note that the sentence is a summary based on the quote, and no quotation marks are used at all.
The third is a partial quotation. This is when we select key phrases from a source's own words, setting just those phrases in quotation marks. For example:
Tom Izzo tells Omar Sofradzija, "You are a God-awful teacher," So, a partial quote could be, Tom Izzo described Omar Sofradzija's skills as "God-awful." Please note that the portion being used inside of quotation marks is EXACTLY what the speaker said, and is a portion that is critical in highlighting context and meaning.
When do we use quotations? To let a source essentially talk directly to a reader (it's not just the writer asking readers to take his or her word for it; he or she is sharing with the audience what was said directly from the source); when the writer can't improve upon the quotation or match its color, rythym, wit or emotion; to tie a controversial opinion or happening to a source; as evidence for the statement; and/or to reveal the speaker's character.
When do you use direct quotes? When such a quote illustrates a key point. The quote shouldn't necessarily tell the whole story.Often, we will summarize a major point, and then follow that summarization with a key quote to explain the idea or provide more specific detail.
For example:
Tom Izzo was promoted to MSU president Tuesday, and his first course of action was to fire journalism instructor Omar Sofradzija.
"You are a God-awful teacher," Izzo told Sofradzija.
See how the first graf sets up the second; the second underlines and supports the main point of the first, and the two grafs support each other?
When do you use indirect quotations? If a direct quote is weak, boring or confusing; when sources fail to state their ideas effectively or coherently, or when a source states the obvious.
For example, let's imagine the Izzo quote we've been using actually was "Omar, you know, uh, you're God-awful at teaching and stuff." Obviously, not a great quote to use, with all the "uh" and "you know" and what-not. So, perhaps you offer a summary that's true to the facts of the quote, like, Izzo was highly critical of Sofradzija's teaching skills. No quote marks needed, intent expressed accurately but grammar cleaned up for clarity.
When do we use partial quotations? One could be used in the aforementioned situation by stripping a key, telling word or phrase from a shoddy or long quote, like this: Izzo described Sofradzija's teaching ability as "God-awful." We should use these very sparingly. Partial quotes can be awkward, wordy or unnecessary; they can be misleading or libelous if the partial quote changes meaning and context; and it leaves the audience suspicious of what you cut out.
Do you change quotations, to do things like correct grammatical errors? No. Never. NEVER EVER EVER. If it's inside of quotation marks, it should be EXACTLY what the person said. If Izzo said "I'm gonna fire you!" then it should be "gonna," not "going to." If the poor grammar bothers you that much or if you think it would be confusing to the audience, then consider a paraphrase or partial quote.
What is attribution? Attribution is labeling for your readers the person that was the source of information. For example, if we have a quote like, "I'm gonna fire you!" Tom Izzo said, the Tom Izzo said part of that is the attribution.
Attribution allows writers to rely on the expertise of their sources; for example, if you're writing a story about a house fire, attributing information to firefighters and witnesses and home occupants increases your credibility, because it's clear to readers that your information is coming from people who are very relevant to the fire. It builds credibility with readers.
It also allows readers to know and vet the reliability of your sources. (If you're doing a story about Tom Izzo quitting as basketball coach and statements are attributed to Tom Izzo, readers know it's solid. If it's attributed to his wife or assistant coaches, readers know it's from people who are in a position to know. If it's attributed to an eighth-grader living in Ann Arbor, not so much. If it's attributed to no one, who knows, then?)
What kinds of statements require attribution? For example:
Information you get from other people, such as from personal interviews: "I love donuts," Tom Izzo said.
Information you get from documents: Tom Izzo eats 150 donuts a day, according to medical records.
Information that was not offered to you first-hand, such as reports from other media: Tom Izzo was rejected as a Weight Watchers spokesman because of his donut-eating habits, according to CNN.
Information gathered online from Web sites: Tom Izzo has ballooned up to 400 pounds, according to ESPN.com. He is eating 150 donuts a day, Izzo said via his Twitter account.
Statements about controversial issues. Be sure to use quotes to make clear key story points: Izzo said donuts are healthy, contradicting scientific research. "If donuts were bad for you, they wouldn't taste so good," he said.
Statements of opinion. As neutral journalists, we need to be clear we're not offering an opinion; the people we're reporting on are: "Donuts are the greatest thing ever brought to earth by the little baby Jesus, which I prefer over the bearded older Jesus,"Tom Izzo said.
All direct and indirect quotations. We need to make sure readers know who is saying what, every time.
Pretty much every paragraph after the lede and nut graf. The lede and nut graf are usually a summary of things from various sources, but after that point we need to be specific on bits of info. We'll get into how to do this a bit more when we move on to how to structure a story in the very near future.
What kinds of statements do NOT require attribution? Very few, actually. For example:
Undisputed facts. Like, the sun rises in the East every morning.
Things the reporter witnessed. If you're covering a football game, you don't need to say, MSU beat Notre Dame, 104-0, the scoreboard said. You were presumably watching the game from the press box; you could simply say, MSU beat Notre Dame 104-0, and leave it at that.
Guidelines for the placement and frequency of attribution: Attribution can be at the beginning or the end of a sentence (for example, Izzo said Michigan sucks, or Michigan sucks, Izzo said.)
But it should not interrupt a sentence or thought (for example, don't say, The University of Michigan sucks, Izzo said, because they are wimps, with the attribution at mid-sentence. Instead, put the attribution at the start or end of the sentence, like this: Izzo said the University of Michigan sucks because they are wimps, or The University of Michigan sucks because they are wimps, Izzo said.)
Attribution should be placed at the start of any paragraph where there is a change in speaker, to avoid confusion on the part of the reader as to who is saying what.
So, let's say you had a paragraph where you were attributing things to Omar Sofradzija, followed by a graf where you're attributing Tom Izzo. That Izzo graf should begin with, Tom Izzo said, since there is a change in speaker from Omar to Izzo.
Word choice in attributing statements: you cannot say said enough. It cannot be overused. I know in English comp you're taught to mix it up; someone said, then exclaimed, then stated, and whatever.
In journalistic writing, we strive for simplicity. And attributing statements are simple tags, so we try to keep the language simple and direct and consistent. So, if someone said something, just say said.
I know it's gonna look weird to you, having graf after graf that says so-and-so said this, and said that, and said some more. But again, we're striving for simplicity and consistency' not creativity in a word that's nothing more than a simple label.
There are different levels of attribution. The most basic one is known as on the record. That means everything the source says may be published and quoted directly, and that the source may be fully identified by name and title. Reporters should try to keep all or as much as possible on the record.
So, if for example you're interviewing Tom Izzo on the record, anything he says can be used in your story, and can be attributed to him by name and title.
Then, there is off the record. And young journalists are usually confused on what this means, so please pay careful attention here: it means everything a source says CANNOT be used by a reporter. This is often confused with on background or not for attribution, which we'll get into in a moment.
Why would we talk to people off the record, if we can't use what they say? Often, it's done in an effort to gain context and confirm facts from sources that are not authorized to talk about something. Reporters should NEVER use off the record statements as the sole basis for news stories. Rather, use it as a springboard to corroborate facts through sources you can cite, like other sources or documents or whatever.
(For example, if Tom Izzo tells you off the record that Omar Sofradzija is being arrested for shoplifting, you can check police reports for such an arrest, or ask Omar's mom if he's in any trouble with the law.)
Now, let's get to on background or not for attribution, which young journalists frequently confuse with off the record. On background or not for attribution means everything the source says MAY be published and quoted, BUT the reporter may not attribute the statements to teh source by name. This is the typical anonymous source situation.
The reporter MAY describe the source by position in a general way that does not reveal a specific position incidentally, but that does indicate some level of credibility.
(For example, if Tom, Izzo tells you not for attribution that Omar Sofradzija is being fired, you could source it like, A high-ranking MSU official who asked for anonymity said Omar Sofradzija will be fired as a school instructor.)
(When doing so, make sure you don't reveal too much information about the source where you create a virtual identification. Case in point: a few years ago, a newspaper out West did an expose on a corrupt city hall, using an unnamed city hall official as the source. At times in the story, the source was referred to as she. Problem was, there was only one female employee in all of that city hall. Guess who lost their job, and then sued the newspaper for breaching a confidentiality promise?)
If you promise a source anonymity, then that promise is absolute. The only person you may tell is your editor, and then he or he is also bound not to tell anyone. And I mean anyone: not coworkers, not friends, not sources, and not judges, even when they threaten you with jail time for contempt of court (a situation most reporters never face, but one I faced twice early in my professional career).
In general, use anonymous sources sparingly. Please review guidelines on p. 291 in Reporting For The Media for tips.
Guidelines for capitalizing and punctuating quotations. First, where do we put the traditional double quotation marks (")? Quotation marks only go around the actual quote, and not the attribution. The attribution should remain outside the quotation marks. For example: "I love basketball," Tom Izzo said. Not like this: "I love basketball, Tom Izzo said."
When a quote is before attribution, then the quote should end with a comma, then the quotation mark, then the attribution, and then a period after the attribution, like this: "I love basketball," Tom Izzo said. Not like this: "I love basketball." Tom Izzo said.
When the attribution is before the quotation, then the attribution should be followed by a comma, then the quotation mark, then the quote, and then the period at the end of the quote, like this: Tom Izzo said, "I love basketball."
Now, there are times when you have a quote within a quote, like if Tom Izzo is quoting someone, and then you quote Izzo quoting the quote. When we have a quote inside a quote, the inside-quote gets single quotation marks (') and the full quote gets the traditional double marks (").
So, a quote-inside-a-quote combo could look like this: "Forrest Gump once said, 'I gotta pee,'" Tom Izzo said. The double quotation marks are around everything Izzo said, including the quote he quoted. And the quote he quotes from Forrest Gump is inside single quotation marks, which at the end creates the appearance of a triple quotation mark. Which looks weird, but it's correct.
Regarding capitalization, we should capitalize the first word in a quotation that is a complete sentence. For example, we would say, "That's my donut," Tom Izzo said, or Tom Izzo said, "That's my donut," with the first letter of the quote capitalized.
But we do not capitalize the first word in a partial quotation, unless it's at the start of a sentence. So, let's say we're partially quoting Tom Izzo saying "The Wolverines, you know, can suck it and stuff." If we had a partial quotation in the middle or end of a sentence, then we do lower-case: Tom Izzo said, "suck it" to the University of Michigan, or Tom Izzo said the University of Michigan can "suck it."
But if we start the sentence with the partial quote, then it's caps, like this: "Suck it," Tom Izzo said of the University of Michigan.
Any questions? Be sure to call or email or visit me.
No comments:
Post a Comment