More Ledes: Too Much Snark ...

... here?

Instead of meeting his future wife, Scott Forsythe met an early grave this morning in a car accident less then a mile from the church where he was originally to be wed.

Irony is context, but there's also appropriateness. Is it wise to be snarky when it's a story involving someone's death?

It's clever, but I'm not sure it's the right time to do this. 

More Ledes: Say What You Mean; Mean What You Say, Part 1

What is wrong with this lede?

To save the life of a dog, 22-year-old Scott Forsythe lost his life in a car crash just 15 minutes before his wedding this morning.

If you read this lede literally, it's this: you're saying this man died 15 minutes before his wedding. You're suggesting his wedding took place (all "Weekend at Bernie's"-style, perhaps).

But that's not what you meant. What you meant was, he died 15 minutes before his wedding was to take place this morning.

If that's what you meant, then that's what you should have written.

Make sure you say what you mean, and mean what you say. Don't leave room for any misinterpretations. Be precise.

More Ledes: Say What You Mean, Mean What You Say, Part 2

Let's look at this lede: 

A $25 mug shot and fingerprint fee will now be charged to those arrested in East Lansing to aid financial crisis, according to city officials.

Um, the fee is aiding the crisis?

I think what we meant to say was the fee would aid city finances, or battle the financial crisis. But what we said is it would aid the crisis. It would help make things worse.

Let's be sure we say what we mean to say. 

More Ledes: The 5 W's

You may have heard of the 5 W's -- who, what, when, where, why and a non-w: how -- that are central to good journalism. It's important that we identify the most critical of those W's, and include them in our ledes.

Let's look at one lede:

Scott Forsythe, 22, was killed en route on his way to his wedding. Forsythe lost control of his car trying to avoid a dog that walked in the middle of the street. 

Now, let's identify the W's

Who = Scott Forsythe, 22
What = he died while on his way to the wedding
Why = lost control of his car trying to avoid a dog
Where = the middle of the street, but we don't say which one
When = ????
How = see what, why
 
So, we're missing two of the W's (one is totally off the radar, and the other is unclear). When was critical, at least in its most basic form, such as saying, today. (You could include a specific time later in the story). News is something new, so the date would indicate the newness.

Where is also pretty important. Something that happens near where I live and work is probably a bigger deal than something faraway. So an approximate placement (e.g., along Kirkmann Road) would help, as opposed to just saying the middle of the street, which can be anywhere.

Let's add those in the lede (and merge the sentences into one):

Scott Forsythe, 22, was killed en route to his wedding today after losing control of his car trying to avoid a dog that walked in the middle of Kirkmann Road.

Now, our bases are covered. And still at 30 words, and one sentence!

More Ledes: Be Specific

Here's the lede:

A convenience store robbery Wednesday afternoon sent city police on a massive hunt for the armed robber in a stolen vehicle — and the 6-month-old still in the backseat.

Here's the problem: in the back seat was a 6-month-old what?

A dog? A sandwich? A gallon of milk?

It's a girl. We know that. But your readers don't, at least not yet.

When a reader approaches a lede,  we need to remember that they know absolutely nothing about the story they are about to be told. That's why people come to news organizations; to find out what they don't know.

So, we can't assume that the reader knows anything. We have to be on-point and clear. We can't just say a 6-month-old; we need to say it was a 6-month-old girl.

More Ledes: Did You Need The Name?

In your ledes, some of you referred to the car accident victim specifically -- Scott Forsythe -- while others referred to him in the generic -- 22-year-old local man, or something to that effect.

While neither is wrong, I'd say the latter is the best approach. You have no reason to believe Forsythe is someone that would be known by name to your readers. In such cases, the generic identifier would suffice in a first reference, and you can offer the specific name as a secondary detail later in the story.

(Remember, in a real situation you would have the rest of the story to fill in specific details and secondary information!)

Now, if the victim was Oprah Winfrey, the name would be a good bet for the lede, precisely because she is someone many people would instantly recognize by name.

More Ledes: Consider Inclusive Words

Many of you in the animals lede referred to ecologists and biologists. A couple of you simply referred to scientists.

And why not? Ecologists and biologists are scientists. It's simpler and doesn't result in any lost meaning to your readers.

If you have the opportunity to group specifics under a single umbrella term, consider that course of action.