How do we know this?
The tunnel kept collapsing on rescuers, Chenn said.
Is it because Chenn said it to us?
No, it's not. It's because Chenn put it in his report, and then we read the report. So, proper attribution would be something like this:
The tunnel kept collapsing on rescuers, Chenn said in his report.
Let's not forget attribution to the actual source from which we learned of what we are writing about.
Attribution needs to go with everything we didn't witness, and needs to be attributed to the source of information. Often, that source is someone we interviewed. But in other cases, like here, it's the fire report we read. Be sure to cite it, so people know from where you got your information.
So, if your source is a fire report, treat attribution to that report in the exact same way we would treat attribution from an interview subject. And that's true whether our source of information is a person or a report or a stone tablet or graffiti on a wall.
In this story, odds were you should have offered a repeated, according to the fire report over and over again, in graf after graf. That's okay. Just like human source attribution, we simply need to be consistent and thorough, even if it is a bit repetitive.
Also, in this story it would have been wrong to attribute things to the responding officer. That's because you didn't get information from the officer, you got it from the report he wrote.
If we talk so someone, we attribute the person. If we get it from a report the person wrote, then we either attribute it to so-and-so-wrote in a report (or, in the case of witnesses, so-and-so said, according to the report), or we simply attribute it to just, the report said.
The tunnel kept collapsing on rescuers, Chenn said.
Is it because Chenn said it to us?
No, it's not. It's because Chenn put it in his report, and then we read the report. So, proper attribution would be something like this:
The tunnel kept collapsing on rescuers, Chenn said in his report.
Let's not forget attribution to the actual source from which we learned of what we are writing about.
Attribution needs to go with everything we didn't witness, and needs to be attributed to the source of information. Often, that source is someone we interviewed. But in other cases, like here, it's the fire report we read. Be sure to cite it, so people know from where you got your information.
So, if your source is a fire report, treat attribution to that report in the exact same way we would treat attribution from an interview subject. And that's true whether our source of information is a person or a report or a stone tablet or graffiti on a wall.
In this story, odds were you should have offered a repeated, according to the fire report over and over again, in graf after graf. That's okay. Just like human source attribution, we simply need to be consistent and thorough, even if it is a bit repetitive.
Also, in this story it would have been wrong to attribute things to the responding officer. That's because you didn't get information from the officer, you got it from the report he wrote.
If we talk so someone, we attribute the person. If we get it from a report the person wrote, then we either attribute it to so-and-so-wrote in a report (or, in the case of witnesses, so-and-so said, according to the report), or we simply attribute it to just, the report said.
No comments:
Post a Comment