Pulled Quotes

The article “Teller pregnant with twins shot in robbery” on msnbc.com is pretty much your ideal news story. I was surprised by how much this article followed the traditional journalistic rules we’ve been taught in class, since that usually isn’t the case in today’s news stories.

The lead clearly spells out who may have been involved (two teenagers), what happened (shot a pregnant teller), where it occurred (Indianapolis), and when it took place (Tuesday morning).

One thing I noticed in this article is that early on the writer lets the reader know that the woman is in critical condition. This is something I’ve noticed that most news writers are good at doing: giving the most important information, even if it happened last, early on in the piece. One of my big mistakes at the beginning of this semester was that I would leave those important details until the end of the story. Seeing writer after writer give bits of crucial information early in their stories has helped remind me to follow this way of organizing the content in my news stories.

The second paragraph, and other paragraphs that follow, basically reword the lead in a more specific way, which is one of the key things to remember in news writing. In class this semester, when Professor Dehnart mentioned that paragraphs in inverted pyramid style should be written this way, I started noticing that that is exactly how good news stories are written. As soon as I started applying this rule, I started getting the hang of writing inverted pyramid style news stories.

The second paragraph names one of the police officers involved and gave a little more detail about the teller. As the story progresses, the writer gives details about the shooting which enhance the story, but aren’t necessary. The writer also starts including more quotes from the police chief and another police spokesman as the story progresses, to give some extra insight into the case.

As well as being written in inverted pyramid style, this story is also newsworthy because it has proximity (since it happened in the United States) and timeliness (since it happened this morning). This article has a great deal of impact. A story about a woman and her two unborn children being put in danger usually has an emotional impact on readers, and therefore has news value. It also has impact because everyone goes to the bank, so technically this could happen to anyone. This story could hit a lot of readers close to home.

Every time I write a blog for this class, I try to find a random article with the most engaging and concise information. After all, a journalist’s job is to hook the reader and lay out the facts, right? So as I scoured different online news sources, the article, “Man planned Superbowl gunfire, feds say,” caught my attention and was, I thought, a great example of proper journalistic writing.

Within the first sentence, the article covers the who, what, where, when, why, and how, and the rest of this concise story even includes a quote from Kurt William Havelock’s father and gives readers some background about why Havelock was willing to “shed the blood of the innocent” as he stated in his manifesto.

As it turns out, he was denied a liquor license for the bar he wanted to open in Tempe, Arizona, which was going to be (try not to laugh) Halloween-themed. The bar was either going to be called The Haunted Castle or Drunkensteins. Finding out this bit of information definitely bumped the stories likeability up a notch for me. Not only was this story journalistic, but it managed to adequately entertain.

We’ll never know if Havelock would have really gone through with firing off 200 rounds of ammunition, and this story isn’t big enough to have had any real news coverage, but the article is a great read with all the important facts and even some humor.

It may be coincidence, but lately I have been thinking about how all encompassing the internet has become, and wondered if people still listen to the radio anymore. Let’s face it, the internet offers everything. You can download podcasts, music of practically any genre, videos of any kind, I could go on, but it is en endless sea of possibilities. You don’t even have to turn on your TV anymore. Networks such as ABC, FOX, and MTV now offer full episodes of their shows on their website. Why even get out of bed? 

So, when I found this article in The New York Times about NPR (National Public Radio), I got a little excited. It turns out, they are trying to revamp their image. From what the article suggests, it seems there will be new programming. Although, I think I became a little confused midway through, mainly because the article’s title is “Public Radio Tries to Reignite Its Public,” yet the first line reads, “Public radio is drawing its largest audience ever.” 28 million listeners to be exact. So, wait, what is going on? Okay, I keep reading, and I come to find out that, yes, I am infact right, there are creating a new morning program. It seems this is happening in order to freshen the genre that is NPR. The only people I know who listen to NPR include my parents, my gay best friend, and private car drivers. Although, I must admit, NPR has a calming effect on its listeners, especially in comparison with other radio stations that scream rhymes and raps about the station you are tuned into, catchy ads, long commercials. NPR is more mellow. 

The article serves to re-inform the public about a media outlet that has sort of lost its audience in a way. It does have a high volume if listeners, but who are they? And, is NPR’s style updated enough for the changing and growing internet generation? The answer is no, but I think they’re realizing this. 

The SATs are a frightening part of high school. To sit in a room for four hours while taking a standardized exam sends chills down my spine. In addition to the Math and various English segments, the SATs are now including a writing comprehensive section. That is something I would not have a problem with, writing is easy, it is the multiple choice that gets you.

Studies are showing that the writing portion of this exam predicts a student’s GPA after their freshman year of college. Really? That is very interesting, but how? Many students struggle with standardized exams and do poorly because of the pressure. I would like to know how this can predict one’s grades if he simply does poorly on the SATs, but extremely well his freshman year? I could believe there might be a correlation, but a prediction? I just don’t know about that, it seems a little too in-depth and too extreme to predict for something so unpredictable.

Critical linguistic commentary on story, More than 1,000 flee from Calif. wildfire

This story is remarkably straightforward and solid.  No fluff, no editorializing, no unneeded quotation are on offer.  Word choice is professional, yet still creative at times.  Take, for instance, the phrase “wildfire slowly chewed its way…” in the lead.  Chewed here exemplifies interesting, descriptive word choice.  So does “A fixed-wing water tanker,” which differentiates the plane from the aforementioned helicopters, while sounding brighter than simply “airplane.”  

The one and only quote is worthy of its use.  It comes from the main source in the story–a relevant one, by the way–who tells that the fire is “pretty serious,” and provides needed information that the author now doesn’t have to add: “Some of these areas have not burned in over 40 years.”  That there aren’t other quotes is smart because the story is well-rounded and complete as is.  Interviewing evacuees of homes might have been the next seemingly pertinent option in line, but, since no homes have been damaged yet, their words would have done little to add to the story as it currently reads, for the interviewees likely wouldn’t have had anything important to say. 

To criticize the writer a little (after all, I claimed “critical” linguistic critique), he/she could have clarified a sentence by reordering it or adding a comma. It is written “…a San Gabriel Mountains foothill community of about 11,000 popular with artists.”  This sounds funny.  It should either read “…a foothill community popular with artists of about 11,000″ or “…a foothill community of about 11,000, popular with artists.  I know the author is trying to save space and trying to put the newsworthy population figure ahead of the town’s less dire popularity with artists.  However, if length restraint keeps a “that” or “which” out of this sentence–which would make it sound a whole lot better–, newsworthiness should keep the comment about artist out too.  Besides, such an aside makes me wonder if it artists like to live there, or if it is a great subject for paintings.  

The author ends the story well, noting that another fire is burning outside of San Diego.  This reassures the reader that they now know everything crucial that concerns this fire.  It also establishes a related, important fact, without going into a new story.  

In April 21st USA Today on page 3A there was an article written by Chris Joyner called “Cremation industry awaits tougher controls.” While I thought that this article was very well written, I did encounter a few problems, well issues that I personally thought were some problems. I felt like the writer did more background research more than personal, interview type of research. While there was a good amount of information provided to the reader, it kind of felt like a tease because the writer didn’t supply enough detail on all the information provided.  I also would have liked to see more quotes from more sources. I also had some questions that I felt were left answered in the article. First off, what does Joyner mean by regulating cremation? How do they regulate? What are these regulations in each state? How do they determine between honest and dishonest operators? Or is there nothing to determine this by?  I also wanted to know why do they think people are choosing cremation lately? Why do they think the rate of people choosing cremation has increased? Even though having the writer’s opinion would be bias to the article, it would have been interesting to know; instead the writer could have quoted someone who gathered these statistics.

The last thing about the article was while I thought that lead of the article was great, I did think that it sounded more like a feature lead more than like a straight news lead. Even though there is no problem with feature leads, I felt like the rest of the article didn’t seem to fit into a feature news story. 

The Onion reported on a Columbia University cultural anthropology major interning at NASA whose goal is to walk on the moon before his internship expires in Late June. Ryan Hodson lists his people skills, stellar work habits, and outgoing personality as sufficient credentials in joining the NASA astronaut crew.

This story is one of the most positive, uplifting stories I’ve read in a while, and that, in my opinion, gives it its newsworthiness. A guy my age whose out refilling staples, organizing magazines in the break rooms, and moving the cold sodas to the front of refrigerators has dreams and ambitions that are impregnable. He’s faced some steadfast resistance from higher ups who say that they will never allow an intern to participate in a space walk. Hodson, however, brushes that aside claiming that that’s what they say to all the interns so they don’t get their hopes up. Hodson has been busy dropping hints and voluntarily providing his experience with g-forces and advertises that he doesn’t need the training to go to space–which will save NASA hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The publishing of this story is really important to people living in the discouraging times we live in. The fact that there is someone out there who is putting his dreams and ambitions on the highest shelf is a model that everyone should live by. He’s going against the status quo of just accepting failure and that egregious word that we’ve been hearing too much of lately: “No!”

In a story found in The New York Times about Transsexuals is very well written.  The writer tackles the very complex political and law issues surrounding very well, and uses clever rhetoric to display these complexities. 

In the 11th paragraph the author does the best job of this by using a long list of how a transgendered person will be percieved as she/he travels across different borders and cities to sue for the wrongful death of her/his husband.  It is written without ever repeating phrases, but instead rewords phrases which furthers shows how dizzying this situation can be. 

There is also a good deal of different sources in the story which makes it much more informative instead of argumentative, although the beginning could be seen as arguing that the law is not doing its job.  This may also be why the rep from the IRS declined to comment for the story.

This story uses a kind of a feature format where it begins and ends with a personal-human insterest focus on one family.  And all the stuff in the middle is what the story is actually about–identifying what transgendered people face before and after a surgery. 

USA Today reported on the California shark attack and the aftermath of this event.  Friday, a shark attacked a triathlete 14 miles down the shore from San Diego.

This article used the inverted pyramid method of news writing, starting out with the lead.  I found this lead to be a decent one, as it included the who, what, where, and when of the story.  The article then went from specific information to general, ending with some basic information about shark attacks in the United States.

One aspect of this story that I liked, was that the reporter used quotes from both a person who braved the possibility of a shark in the water and a person who decided to stay on land for one weekend out of the year.  This provided both sides of opinion about the shark attack.  I also liked the fact that the writer included information on previous shark attacks in the United States, including the latest ones and the last fatal one that is known.

To round out this story, the writer also included general information about sharks, allowing the reader to have the whole picture, instead of limiting it to this one, isolated incident of a shark attack.  Overall, I found this to be one of the better articles that I have read from USA Today.

As federal health advisers seek to further clarify warnings of the risks of Lasik eye surgery to patients, an AP author’s review of the case for such warnings really hits home.  The author’s lead is powerfully gripping: The story opens with “In fury and despair, patients harmed by Lasik eye surgery told federal health advisers Friday of severe eye pain, blurred vision and even a son’s suicide.  The advisers recommended that the government warn more clearly about the risks of the hugely popular operations.”  These two sentences provoke further reader commitment by establishing the captivating aspect of the story, which is that it provides information about a procedure that is apparently risky, yet still “hugely popular.”  Although, in general, the remainder of the story makes Lasik’s risks seem reasonably tolerable when compared to its likely benefits, the author was wise to open the story with an alarming assessment of the procedure because it is more attention-grabbing than a rosy one would have been.  Besides, the remote–yet real–danger of the operation establishes the basis of the news.  

Comprehensive and balanced attention to both sides of the issue sum up further qualities of the story.  It provides touching testimonials from injured Lasik patients who push for clearer warnings.  It balances those testimonials with fairly safe-looking statistics on the operation.  The result is an unbiased piece that reveals all the information one could want to know about both the controversy and the basics of the procedure.  To round it all out, the sidebars offer explanations to readers’ procedural inquiries, including insight into what doctors should consider foreboding warning signs in characteristics of potential patients.  

The human-interest angle, intertwined with straight-forward reporting of a timely and, in a way, controversial issue, is the lure for the reader.  Hook, line, and sinker were the pros and cons, which built an insightful and enticing, back-and-forth argument for better understanding of, more regulation for, and future studies on the practice of Lasik.   

In a recent travel article from Friday’ s USA Today edition, I found an article discussing the rebate checks that are meant to boost the economy. 

 Laura Bly, the article’s author, did a great job of showcasing the use of an inverted pyramid style in “Travel industry wants you- and your rebate“. 

Furthermore, Bly uses statistical data in her article which I have not previously seen in article when looking for pieces to critique.    Bly switches between using data provided by USA Today polls as well as outside sources such as interviews and documents. 

In addition, the flow of Bly’s article allowed for the reader to easily comprehend the copious amount of information she provided.   

She also figuratively draws an image in the reader’s mind of the possibilities and choices of what to do with their money.  Interestingly,  she also provides a snapshot of a regular American and what they decided to do with their rebate check. 

I thought it would be most appropriate this week to actually talk about a profile piece since I am working on one of my own. The story about Nicole Kidman in USAToday on April 23 talked specifically about Nicole Kidman and her work as a U.N. Ambassador. This particular piece also focused on her work on the U.N. Development Fund for Women.

Although the story does focus a little on the specific U.N. Development Fund for Women the way the journalist structures the story as if Nicole Kidman is the focus. She basically is featured as the most newsworthy event in the story. She is in the lead and then most of the background is given about her and her history in the U.N. I thought this would be a good route for the journalist because she has a very high prominence and can attract readers. The only criticism I have for the piece deals with the last few paragraphs of the story. I don’t think the journalist needs to include the background of Kidman’s marital status or the latest movie she will be in. This story is highly focused on Kidman’s participation in the U.N. and I think the focus should stay on that subject and not diver to her personal life or career as an actress.

I have read many stories in USA Today that have included unnecessary info-graphs and sidebars. Many times, such additions provide redundant information in a slightly different form than it appeared in the story with the sole purpose of filling up space. Such stories would be better served by cutting out the charts, graphs and bullet lists and finding a more useful purpose for the extra space.

In the recent article “Knowing rights if flight’s canceled may get you a seat” I found just the opposite to be true. The article highlights the importance of knowing your air travel rights in a time when wide-spread cancellations are becoming more frequent. An anecdotal lead starts the story out, followed by a paragraph highlighting a rise in airline cancellations that has left hundreds of thousands of passengers stranded in recent weeks. The story then introduces Rule 240, a “secret weapon” that supposedly offers fliers a remedy when faced with long delays and grounded flights. Details follow in the next paragraphs which explain where the rule originated, how to use the rule and other useful information for travelers. After that point in the story I stopped reading the actual article because of the large info-graph smack-dab in the middle of the page. The graphic lists all of the major airlines with a breakdown of how to use Rule 240 and what consumers can expect when using the rule with each different company. Basically, the box provides the most important, most relevant information travelers could want from the article without them having to read the entire thing. In this case, the sidebar overshadows the written article to a fault, distracting readers like me from even finishing the story.

In last weeks USA Today there was an article in section A written by Calum MacLeod called “Chinese rally round their own in defense against protesters.” While the article was really well written, I have to admit I was pretty lost the first time I read it. While there was a lot of information provided that was informative, interesting and relevant to the article, a lot of questions were unanswered. I think that when including all this information, readers in return are left with more questions that remain unanswered in the article. Therefore I felt that maybe there was too much information in this article because the article seemed to bounce around from one idea to the next, and in the end I questioned what the main purpose and point of the article really was. Some of the questions that I had and remained unanswered in my opinion were: Why were there protests dogging the torch relay? Why is the torch relay called the “Journey of Harmony?” What harsh rule in Tibet? Why does the Chinese government claim that the foreign news media is biased against China? Why does Tang blame the western news media for bringing trouble on itself? While these may seem like unimportant questions, I happened to find them important in order for the reader to understand the article. I think it becomes extraneous when a bunch of different information is divulged and with that information, more questions arise that remain unanswered. 

I thought that the article was really well written, and had a great lead that set up the rest of the article. The article was also very informational, so it was obvious that the writer did a lot of research for this article. The article also had some great sources, however, personally as a reader I would have liked to read a quote or statement about how the protesters themselves feel. 

I found an interesting article in USA Today regarding the reinstated rule of the death penalty. The article was intriguing because I actually didn’t know that June of 2006 was when the Supreme Court decided to stall the executions. The article was entitled “States move on executions,” and it caught my attention.

It did leave me with a few questions: When did the Supreme Court decide to stall on the death penalty issue? What were the reasons? How many people were scheduled to be on death row for the past two years then? I thought the article was interesting and was an interesting topic; however, it spoke to an audience that knew the answers to these questions. Otherwise, the reader could be left confused. This is an enormous issue and one that readers might want to know more about.