Monday, April 7, 2014

Job Shadows: What You Saw, Part 1


Here's a sampling of some of the various job shadows done by you all (this will be updated as job shadow reports are turned in, so please check back frequently). Take a look and see what you can learn from everyone's visits. There's a lot of good stuff here to help you decide what you want to do with your lives; what you need to be doing to get there; and what to expect when you do get there.

Please give each one of these a quick read, will you?

*****
 
Up until my job shadow experience I had a completely false idea of what broadcast journalism was. I was enlightened of what it truly meant when I left the ABC 12 news station in Flint. When I arrived to the station, Patrick Wilson, the assignment editor, took me on a tour of the entire building. We were making up time until Dawn Jones, the anchor I was shadowing, came into work. He started by showing me the newsroom where the anchors, reporters, and producers work. Everyone had their own desk and when we walked through there was only about six people in the room; Wilson later told me that this was due to people taking vacations and getting sick. Connected to the newsroom were editing rooms that were numbered. Wilson told me this is where reporters and anchors edited film and recordings. We then proceeded to the control room where two people were setting up for the day. The room was illuminated by the plethora of buttons and controls. After, he took me into the set room where the news is filmed. It was different seeing it in real life versus on television. The desk where the anchors sit is in the center, to the right are a couch and a chair for interviews, and to the left is the meteorology corner. On our way out, Wilson showed me the photography and film room.

            Once we finished what Wilson called the “nickel tour” we went into a meeting room where I was fortunate to sit at the table where the reporters and producers sat and talked. One man handed out a paper that was labeled as the daily planner which had a table with several cells with information in it. The cells contained story slugs, segment, assignment info, shot time, location, show, assigned reporter, and contacts. During the meeting producers talked about what stories to run that day, who was assigned where, follow-ups, and possible leads. I was told that some businesses in Flint have cut their business hours so now it is difficult for them to contact people. There was a pile on the end of the table that consisted of press releases and flyers. Wilson told me this is partly how they get leads on stories.

            After the meeting, I sat at a desk across from Rebecca Jensen, a producer. She told me that their station has a low budget so instead of having writers and producers, the producers just write for the anchors. I thought that this was really interesting because Jensen said that when she first started studying journalism she did not expect to work as a producer. She only became interested in producing after she interned with a station.

When Jensen begins her day she starts from scratch. The stories that are featured on the news come from what was discussed in the meeting, from a program called CNN News Source, and from Facebook. She said she also gets her stories from a tool called A.P. Wire. The stories are written in a program called A.P. ENPS. In order to follow-up on stories she has to call people and interview them on the spot. In order to finish before her time slot of the show she gives herself a deadline and prints the outline a half hour early. Sometimes, Jensen said, she is writing updates during the show. “As a producer you have to be very willing to change,” Jensen said.

When I asked her if she has ever made any mistakes, she said she had but only a few and she tries to be clear and concise. At the end of our conversation she had a lot of advice for me. She told me that internships will help me grow immensely and become connected into the field. I was also told to be very open and friendly to people because it is important to build a big network of resources who trust you.

When Dawn Jones arrived to the station she was more than happy to take me under her wing and show me the ropes. Jones is an anchor for the noon and four p.m. broadcast. She works alongside her co-anchor Larry Elliot and they rotate tasks every day. One day she will do interviews and another day she will do radio and a brief. When I asked her what made her want to do broadcast, she said she fell in love with radio in college and then switched to live broadcast later.

Jones begins her day by looking over her stories the producers write for her. If she is doing the radio brief she will read over the lines and re-write the stories. She did this on Friday morning and once she printed out the re-written stories, we headed into an editing room. In the room were three computer monitors, a phone, and a microphone. Jones sat down and behind closed doors she began to record herself reading the stories. After editing, cropping, and listening, the story was then sent out to the station’s radio.

The news brief is what she works on next; the news brief is a tease of the stories that will be on the show that day. Jones said she gets to choose which stories to brief on and she has to edit the video that will appear as well as write a script she reads from. Jones had to edit her own video and read the script over the video in the studio. She taught me that reading the script over the video is called V.O.-S.A.T. Jones said she had to learn how to edit video and that the first video she edited took her about eight hours to finish.

Once finished with her tasks, Jones does a run through of the stories she has to read and then puts on her makeup. Jones said that sometimes there are updates or changes on the stories while she’s reading them off. The updates are transmitted through an earpiece she wears while broadcasting. She said it is difficult not to nod or confirm the updates.

When putting on her makeup, Jones told me she puts makeup on in order to give people one less thing to talk about. She said that some of her colleagues have been verbally attacked through online comments. She said that she has to have thick skin in order not to take things personally. Once finished with her makeup, Jones took me into the studio and I got to watch the show live. It was exciting watching the director and camera operator count the anchors down and change up the format. After the hour was up Dawn stayed later than her co-anchor and meteorologist. She spoke to someone from ABC headquarters and then recorded a tease for the four p.m. show.

I am glad a job shadow was required for this class because if it wasn’t I probably would’ve never gone. I was told by Patrick Wilson to come back for an internship and get experience. Without this opportunity I still would have had the skewed notion that broadcasting is just like how it is portrayed on Anchorman.

*****


I job-shadowed Sean Carroll on Monday, March 3rd at The University of Notre Dame where he holds the position of Assistant Athletics Media Relations Director.



A press conference was held after the first spring football practice for the Irish Monday morning. Brian Kelly, coach of the Irish football team, was the first to speak. He addressed his expectations for the upcoming season and talked about the strengths and weaknesses he sees the team facing this year. Everett Golson also spoke at the conference, his first time appearing in front of the media since returning to the team after a season-long suspension from the University last year. The press was interested to hear about how Golson was feeling to be back at ND and what he learned while he was away.



Other players were also present at the press conference, seated in various parts of the room where reporters were able to go and speak to them individually rather than speaking at the podium.



Sheldon Day, one of the Irish’s defensive lineman, was asked to talk about his plans to help fill the loss of two key players at the same position, Stephon Tuitt and Louis Nix. The press wanted to hear about how he feels to have increased responsibility on his shoulders both as a player and leader of the defense.



Matthias Farley, last season’s starter at safety who is now moving to cornerback, was also present. The media was interested in hearing how Farley plans to adjust to the new role and what he hopes to accomplish during the team’s spring practices.



Cam McDaniel, one of the team’s many running backs, also spoke to the media about his visions for the upcoming season and how he feels he can provide leadership to younger running backs.



Kyle Brindza and Joe Schmidt were also at the press conference.



When I asked Sean about what he wishes he would have known during his college years at Indiana University, he responded by saying, “I wish that I would have taken more advantage of the opportunities that exist on campus. Even though I ended up in athletic media relations, I never worked in the office at Indiana– most departments have student workers. If I had worked in their office it could have given me valuable experience before I even graduated. Since I didn't do that, I had to volunteer at a couple schools after graduation in order to make up for my lack of experience.”



Sean said he also wishes he would have explored doing work with the student radio station. He believes that it would have been an easy opportunity for him to get experience in a field that he might have wanted to explore, and that there were a lot of journalism-related opportunities at IU that he didn't take full advantage of.



Sean said, “I got caught up in the trap of thinking just because my schoolwork was done that I didn't need to do anything else that could potentially help me down the road. I think most schools provide great opportunities for students that can help them boost their resume in a practical, hands-on way.”



Aside from receiving valuable advice from Sean, it was very interesting to be able to see the action behind journalism. In class, we learn about how to write the stories with the information we have and what to do if we go to a press conference or meeting, but we aren’t able to actually see it. In doing this assignment I was able to really be thrown into the middle of the real-world excitement of journalism and observe what was going on and how reporters do their jobs up-close.

*****


Out-Of-Class #2: An Overview

If there was a general weakness with the rewrites, it was a superficial approach to upgrading the work. Fixes were made regarding AP Style and punctuation and grammar, but not so much with doing more interviews with a broader range of sources or fact-testing presumptions and claims by finding data that would help support or counter a claim.

In one instance, we cited someone as saying living on campus resulted in better grades, but we offered no proof. It took me about two seconds of Googling to find such proof by Googling a simple search term: correlation between living on campus and better grades.

In another story about on-campus parking, we cited someone's bok when they declined to be interviewed. That's better than nothing, but it would have been even better to find another neutral parking expert to cite. By Googling the search term, parking research papers, I came across a number of studies about parking.

More importantly, it helped me identify more experts -- the authors of the research papers -- who then I could try to contact and interview.

The end result for those who just made the superficial changes is that I awarded a rwrite grade that was barely better than the original -- if the grade went up at all.

Here's a reminder of what I'm focused on when I'm grading you all:

Journalism is about exploration; that is, getting out and talking to a multitude of sources to really get a solid feel for what's actually out there, and not simply what you presume from the start. It means finding and interviewing many people from a variety of sides of a story, as opposed to finding a handful of people to meet an arbitrary sourcing minimum and fill in the spaces between your presumptions.

We're supposed to be seeing if those presumptions are valid based on talking to many people, and not just finding people to match our presumptions.
 
In many stories, we had just one side of an issue. Maybe we just talked to officials in charge of something. Maybe we just talked to people affected by something. Maybe we just talked to neutral experts, who have no vested interest in how things turn out, but know a lot about the subject at hand.

What we need to do is talk to all such groups. Not just one, and not even just two of three. We need to explore all the levels of complexity of a story, and reach out to all the niche groups that have an interest in what is happening, is affected by what is happening, is in charge of what is happening, and is expect in what is happening.

For example, in one story about businesses that profit from football games, we talked to a ton of businesses and got a bunch of good info on how spending goes way up on home game days. But we didn't talk to a single one of the spenders -- fans! If the story is about fan spending, shouldn't we talk not just to those who take the money, but those who give, too?
Plus, the story lacked any kind of a neutral expert, who would be able to more fully flesh out what the trends and patterns mean. And in a big-sports college town, I would think just about any business or econ professor would be able to talk on the subject expertly.

So, it should have been a story in three dimensions: one side (the money-takers), the other side (the money-spenders), and the neutral experts (money experts). But we told it in only one dimension. That's not fully exploring a subject, and that's not journalism, either.

To find such sources, we need to ask ourselves, who is interested in this? Who is affected by this? Who is in charge of this? Who is expert in this? And where might I find these people?

Then, we need to find them.

Google is your pal, sure. But it starts with your own curiosity, and your willingness to act upon it. You can't just race to the minimum three sources and think, I'm done. You're done when you've answered those aforementioned questions in italics; then interviewed all those people; and then answered all their questions.

Only then do you know what you have. Only then do you know what to write. Only then have you committed an act of journalism.

Another part of journalism is qualifying superlatives; that is, showing the audience data and facts and quotes from sources to support why something is the best or biggest or greatest or controversial or sad or outrageous.

For example, if you're writing about the Ice Cream Festival and you say it's the biggest yet, don't just say it, show it by offering attendance figures and ticket revenue and the number of vendors as compared to previous years so I can see the facts behind the conclusion.

If we're saying fans had a blast, let's quote more than a festival organizer who has a vested interest in saying his or her event was awesome; let's talk to participants -- plural -- and see what they think, and include many of their quotes so that the audience isn't just taking your word for it, or the word of someone with a bias; they're getting proof that the feeling was universal.

And if those sources contradict your original premise? Then follow the facts. Again, stories shouldn't be written based on presumptions; presumptions and conventional wisdom is our starting point for fact-testing those presumptions. In the end, we write what we write based on what we discovered.

Yet, some of us did so little interviewing it was hard to discover anything, other than a smattering of quotes that got only one side of a multiple-sided issue; or superficially plucked just one source from each category, without really seeing if others shared their views or not; or failed to contact neutral experts who could help contextualize what people were saying; or failed to have data that could show the audience without a doubt why something is so.

Worse yet, some of us seemed to take story slants not based on what sources on opposite sides and neutral experts were telling us; rather, we were expressing conventional wisdom without attribution, or making arguments for a side of an issue without attribution.

That may be fine writing, but without greater research and then writing to represent what you found, it's a great argument or opinion piece or debate argument or courtroom argument or even public relations. But it's not journalism.

We explore. We interview. We write based on what we find. And before we write, we need to do enough exploring where it's overwhelmingly clear based on our first-hand interviews what the angle should be.

All because we're great writers does not mean we'll automatically be great journalists. We need to be curious, and act on our curiosity by doing lots and lots of interviews from a broad array of sides. 

Plus, journalism is about substance, not style. Like I already said, in the rewrites many of us addressed the stylistic and grammatical issues I brought up, but barely did any additional interviewing or data-gathering, if they did any at all. While I appreciated a cleaned-up story, the failure to address areas of true substance -- more interviews, broader interviews, data to support generalizations that were being made -- resulted in no grade changes at all for some folks between the original version and the rewrite.

If you answer questions substantially, it's fair to expect a substantial grade improvement. If you answer them superficially, then the needle won't move. Worse yet, in a professional environment the hope that questions posed by your editor will simply go away is not a strategy that will ensure continued employment.

Get into the habit of taking a deep breath, buckling down and addressing the issues I pose to you, in the same way an editor would. Hoping that I (or an editor) won't re-ask the question or forget that we asked it in the first place simply won't happen. You can't simply try to write around a hole in the story. We will find it, and we will demand the hole be filled in a substantial way: via additional reporting.

Out-Of-Class #2: A Super Example


Here is an example of a very, very good out-of-classer, with extensive interviews from a wide range of sources and neutral experts and telling statistics and nice writing and organization. Please take a look and get some ideas on how we all can best report and structure our stories:

(name redacted)
JRN 200

Out-Of-Class

03/25/14

Slug: Smartphones





As technology advances, smartphones are becoming a larger part in a growing number of students’ lives serving as both a source of information and connection but also a distraction.



According to a 2014 study conducted by Pew Research Center on smartphone ownership, as of January 58 percent of American adults owned a smartphone of some kind with ownership showing to be particularly high among those in their twenties and thirties.



This is an increase of 13 percentage points from what was reported in February of 2012 and an increase of two percentage points from what was recorded in May of 2013 for the amount of adults that owned smartphones, according to Pew Research Center.



Michigan State University Professor of Psychology Dr. Linda Jackson said technology has been having a tremendous impact on students’ lives. In an email interview Jackson said, “Just count the number of students walking around or entering or leaving class with a cell phone ‘attached’ to the ears. Consider the number of text messages students send and receive each day.”



According to a 2012 “Teen, Smartphones & Texting” study conducted by Pew Research Center, in 2009 the median number of texts sent on a typical day by a teenager was 50 and rose to 60 texts by 2011; an increase of 20 percentage points.



Jackson, whose current research explores the effects of information technology use on cognitive, social, psychological and moral development said that technology and social media take time way from students.



She said, “It pervades all aspects of a student’s life, from social relationships with family and friends to academic performance to time for other pursuits.”



Lauren Keiser COMMA HERE a MSU psychology student and owner of a smartphone, said her phone can be a distraction but she finds that having a smartphone is overall beneficial and said she mainly uses it to send emails, stay organized and keep up on social media.



“I don’t watch a lot of TV so [social media] is my source for current events… it’s like the world is at my fingertips,” said Keiser. “I use calendars to keep appointments and things. I actually use an app for homework where it keeps track of due dates which is helpful.”



Fellow MSU psychology student Aubrey Gilliland said she uses her smartphone for the same purposes, but that being in constant contact with everything through her phone can get annoying.



Gilliland said, “I’m not one to text people all the time and when that is something that other people do it gets annoying.”



Gilliland also said that having a smartphone is beneficial academically. “Group messaging for group projects is really helpful because if we all have iPhones we can group message to find time to work together rather then have to email everyone or call them separately,” said Gilliland.



Gilliland said her smartphone can be a distraction but that it depends on the size of the class. “I’m less likely to use [my smartphone] in smaller classes but in big lecture halls it is tempting,” she said.



A University of Nebraska-Lincoln study said on average, the typical college student plays with a digital device 11 times a day while in class and over 80 percent of the students in the study said that the use of their digital device can interfere with their learning.





Dr. Karen Riggs, a professor of media studies at Ohio University, said in an email interview that there are those negative implications to smartphone usage.



Communication networks and apps on mobile phones can distract students from face-to-face communication and studies,” said Riggs. “They can also interfere with the classroom experience for which they pay so dearly. If you're texting, even though you might think you can multi-task well, you're likely to miss some important things in class.”



A University of Nebraska-Lincoln study said on average, the typical college student plays with a digital device 11 times a day while in class and over 80 percent of the students in the study said that the use of their digital device can interfere with their learning.



Riggs, whose research focuses on media and age, said she does believe that smartphones are both beneficial and functional.



Both phone and texting are a great means to keep in touch with friends and family. Students can make plans, keep up with others when they can't be together in person, and pursue casual conversation,” said Riggs. “Social network functions are just as important. Keeping in touch and up to date on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, and now Snapchat, adds value to mobile devices that suit students' lifestyles.”



She also said that students can best utilize their smartphones by using them as digital planners and by taking advantage of more easily accessible communication with professors.



“Instructors are increasingly using social networks such as Twitter to make announcements and encourage conversation,” said Riggs.



Jackson said that when used properly, technology has the potential to improve academic performance.



Psychologically there is evidence that technology use can increase self-esteem, self-competency and self-efficacy. In lay terms, knowing how to use technology can make you feel better about yourself overall, feel more competent and believe you can do things you want to do,” said Jackson.









Word Count: 724













Sources




Title: MSU Professor of psychology; Department of psychology; College of Social Science


Phone:  (517) 353-7207



Name: Lauren Keiser

Major: Psychology




Name: Aubrey Gilliland

Major: Psychology





Title: Ohio University Professor of Media Studies; School of Media Arts and Studies; Scripps College of Communication



Phone:  (740) 590-4012



Pew Research Center “Smartphone Ownership” Study






University of Nebraska-Lincoln Study (pg 5-14):










REWRITE GRADE: (redacted)

ORIGINAL GRADE:(redacted)

AVERAGE/FINAL:(redacted, but it was a very good one)

INSTRUCTOR COMMENTS: NICE WORK!

JRN 200: We Have Some Published Authors ...

.. in The Big Green!

We wrote about shitty bus service ...

... and international students ... 

... and summer internships!

Good job, guys!


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 spring of 2014. 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 The Big Green, at thebiggreen.net.


But you know that, from what you saw above. Others include:
Uloop, at msu.uloop.com/main/


HerCampus, at hercampus.com

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.

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.

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Neutral Experts: Sometimes They Find You

Yesterday I got this email:

Hi Omar,

In about a month, MSU seniors will walk across the stage, receive their degrees and begin life in the “real world,” a world that greets them with a tremendous obstacle: tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt. I thought your college newspaper, The State News, might be interested in talking to Charles Hoff, financial education counselor, DFCU Financial, for a story about how new grads can prepare for, and eliminate, student debt and successfully position themselves to achieve financial milestones throughout the rest of their lives.

Here is a little background information:

Research shows that a household with $53,000 in outstanding student debt – the average college loan balance for a two-person family with four-year degrees – will be about $208,000 poorer during a lifetime than a similar household with no student loan debt. Charles warns that while there are multiple approaches to paying off this debt, some will severely limit financial mobility later in life and prevent grads from achieving significant financial milestones. I think that Charles’ insight could really benefit 2014 grads and help them realize how important it is to start thinking about their finances now.

He has some great tips for positioning graduates for long-term financial stability. Is this something you would be interested in covering? If so, I’d be happy to an interview with Charles.

Thanks and let me know!

Sarah Bachleda
Assistant Account Executive
The Quell Group
2282 Livernois Road
Troy, Michigan 48083

... and that's not unusual. Quite often, sources seeking some free publicity will reach out to media organizations, pitching story ideas in the hope that they'd be used in the story. Or if there's a hot breaking story going on, an expert may contact newsrooms and see if they'd like to use the source as a source (think aviation experts on the missing Malaysian plane story).

Sometimes, they get their way; other times, they don't. Either way, it never hurts to take down the person's contact info and keep it handy, and build your own experts' list to use when you need it.

MM #2: What You Did

In order of completion:

Kelsey B.: Living off-campus video and blog post and follow-up post and  tweets #livingonvsoff

We are writing these blog posts in a journalistic style, so let's avoid using first-person references.

Sami S.: for what do students pay video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #jrn$

We don't write in huge paragraphs in print, so let's not do the same in blog posts.

Brittanie C.: transitional housing video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #housingms

The vid title slide says, "Transitional Housing." Well, what about it? Like a lede, the news isn't the topic; it's what's going on with the topic, like "What Do Students Think About Transitional Housing?"




Hayley J.: study abroad video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #sabenefitsjrn200 

Chelsea E.: relationships video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #universityloving

Alyssa R.: fashion trends video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #jrn200leggings

Let's not forget a lede title slide or caption or narration.

Amber H.: campus safety video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #msuareyousafe

We only have one post; we needed two. What we were looking to do was have two posts that could be read independently but also were related; like one post on what authorities have to say about safety, and another on student reaction.

Plus, we need to be sure we're using full and proper first attributions (in the blog, the sergeant is the sergeant of what? MSU Police? And what is UNC? In the tweets, who is "he"? Don't assume people picked up the previous tweet; add the name in each tweet where the person is quoted).

Josh T.: free stuff video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #asmsufreeservices

These blog posts show that independent-but-complementary relationship we're aiming for: one post on what is offered and why, and another on student reaction. In the tweet stream, we need a first reference for Mozina.

Meagan B.: international students video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #internationaljrn200

We needed some video b-roll of the students walking to class, or taking notes, or otherwise doing daily sorts of activities so we could show the audience, and not just tell them what they have to say.

And each blog post essentially has the same lede. We want to evolve the content by building upon what was previously posted, and not just copy it. 

Megan E.: hockey video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #jrn200redwings

Again, the blog posts overlap instead of complement. We blended in both posts stuff about the jersey retirement and the player trade when it would have naturally cleaved along those lines: one post about the retirement; and the other about the trade.

Plus, this is still news, which means no unattributed opinions, which means leaving out the last tweet and vid caption. The medium is different, but if it's journalism the same rules apply as in print. We're observers; and not promoters or fans.

Jessica S.: study abroad video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #msustudyabroad

If we were trying to separate our tweet stream from the tweetsphere, this hash tag was too generic.

Plus, we need to make sure we adequately proof our video: sophomore is misspelled in one of the captions. Again, same rules as in print.

Akshita V.: investigation video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #msufedsjrn200 

With the hyperlinks, it would have been better instead of linking to superficial items like the general Department of Education and MSU Web sites if we linked to items that were specific to the investigation itself, such as other news articles. While borrowing from other media is generally discouraged in print, online it is valuable background.

Plus, the second post had kind of a fuzzy lede; we need to be clear and specific at the start as to what we're getting into, like we would be in a news story.

Emily J.: drink biz video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #vemmajrn

Cristi F.: Eat at State video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #msucafe

Again, the hash tag isn't unique enough to separate our content from the pack. Plus, if we're gonna talk to guys about working in the caf, we need B-roll showing them working in the caf. Show us; don't just tell us.

Amra D.: smartphones video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #spjrn

Very good hyperlinks in the lede post here, where we get detailed sources of information backing up the general conclusions being made in the post.

Krystyn C.: parking video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #parkingatmsujrn200

With the video, we don't need a second name attribution, since the viewer can already link the face to the first attribution. But we do need more in-interview B-roll, especially shots that show what is being spoken about: bicyclists, cars zipping by, buses, crowded parking lots, etc.

Aaron S.: no more hockey video and blog post and follow-up post and tweets #imhockeynomore

We need a stronger lede tweet; it's vague -- what is Munn? -- and could be confusing to someone just jumping onto the stream. Plus, with the posts there's a bit too much overlap; one post could have been solely on the renovations, and the other just on what that meant for IM hockey.

Now, what did you like? Or not so much? And why?

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

JRN 200: Deadlines

Here's a recap of the latest deadlines for you to keep track of:

>>> Unless you've heard from me otherwise, everyone is approved for tip sheets 3 and 4, if they were submitted to me prior to 2 p.m. Wednesday, Mar. 26.

>>> As  indicated in class Wednesday, out-of-class #3 will consist of a written out-of-class story following the usual rules; a 1-2 minute video version of either the whole story or an aspect/angle of it (for example, on a story or pros and cons of living off-campus, perhaps the video story centers on student opinions on the issue only); preview and recap posts that can be split by one side/the other side (for example, on a story about  pros and cons about living off-campus, maybe one post is about pros and the other cons; or one post is about what experts have to say, and the other is about what students say) and a tweet stream where we follow an earlier post's directions on how to tweet for non-breaking news.

The multimedia requirements will mostly follow that of the second multimedia project assigned Wednesday, except it will all be on the same topic as the third out-of-class written story. We will be telling the same story in all mediums: print, online, video and social media.

Rules will apply as previous: the written story must be at least 700 words with at least two human sources, all sides of the story represented, at least one neutral expert, any necessary background data, etc.; the video must contain at least two human sources and relevant b-roll; the blog posts must be 100-200 words each, with each containing at least two relevant hyperlinks; the tweet stream must be at least 12 tweets long with a unifying unique hash tag.

>>> The written third out-of-class story will be due no later than 9 a.m. Monday, April 7 by email to omars@msu.edu, under the subject line of ooc3. The multimedia components of the third out-of-class story will be due no later than (with links to the video, blog posts and tweets)

>>> Then, the rewrite for the third out-of-class story will be due no later than 9 a.m. Wednesday, April 16 to omars@msu.edu.

>>> The multimedia component of the third out-of-class story will be due no later than 9 a.m. Thursday, April 17 by email to omars@msu.edu, under the subject line of mm3. Parameters are as posted above.


>>> The fourth out-of-class story will be due no later than 9 a.m. Wednesday, April 23 to omars@msu.edu under the subject line of ooc4. That is the final day of class. This assignment is optional for regular students and mandatory for honors credit.

>>> The deadline for the job shadow report and all extra credit is also no later than 9 a.m. Wednesday, April 23 to omars@msu.edu. 

>>> In the meantime, the second multimedia assignment is due no later than 10 a.m. Tuesday, April 1 by email to omars@msu.edu, under the subject line of mm2. Parameters of the required 1-2 minute video, two blog posts and a tweet stream are as detailed in class Wednesday and listed in a related blog post.

>>> Plus, the rewrite of the second out-of-class story will be due no later than 10 a.m. Thursday, April 3 via email to omars@msu.edu.

So, here's the deadlines, in time order:
 
Tuesday, April 1: Second multimedia assignment
Thursday, April 3: Second out-of-class story rewrite
Monday, April 7: Third out-of-class story
Wednesday, April 16: Third out-of-class rewrite
Thursday April 17: Third multimedia assignment
Wednesday, April 23: Fourth out-of-class story; job shadow report, all extra credit.