Pulled Quotes

I’d just like to point out some great journalism in Stetson’s Reporter in a story about Public Safety and a sexual harassment complaint. Not coincedentally, it was done by me.

This was a sort of difficult story because the newsworthy thing was that Public Safety denied these allegations, but most of the reporting involved the actual incident itself. I think I manage to use both of them in the lede: “Stetson’s administration denied claims of sexual harassment after two Public Safety officers allegedly keyed into a room where two students were sleeping in only their underwear.”

Since I need to transition to the meat of the story here instead of focusing on Public Safety’s denial, I got a really good quote that let’s me do that: “Nothing was done that was wrong,” said Duane Knecht, Associate Vice President for Facilities Management. “I believe that the officers did what was right, and I do not believe they should have done anything differently.”

I like all the quotes in this story, particularly this one: Knecht said that the officers responded to a loud female voice within the room and that the situation was Keys’s fault because she was violating fraternity visiting hours. “Choosing to ignore University policy was the driving force behind the situation,” he said in an email. (Note: I didn’t actually do all the reporting for this, but I wrote the whole story).

So, I guess what I’m trying to say is that I actually did learn something from this class. I hope this makes up for the embarassingly few blog posts I did.

I read an article on April 13 in USAToday that talked about a Michigan University that has closed temporarily because of threatening graffiti messages in the men’s bathroom. The article immediately caught my eye because of the lead and headline.

The lead was very informative and gave a good deal of information in less than 25 words. It definitely answered the who, what, where, why and how very straightforwardly. I thought the journalist did a great job at giving as much detail as possible. My first question when I read the lead was “what did the messages say that were so threatening that could have caused a school to close down?” Next sentence after the lead answered my question (threats about an even that would occur on April 14).

I thought the journalist also was very effective at using the inverted pyramid, he gave the most juicy and relevant facts first then went into background. Overall the story was well written with some good sources, such as head security officers at the campus and campus officials.

AP Writer, Michelle Roberts recently wrote an article on the Texas Polygamist Ranch.  The article was discussing the Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  Roberts has a strong lead, including all the 5 W’s.

Robert has a great grasp of the inverted pyramid, using the second,third,fourth, and fifth paragraphs to offer readers subsequent details about the Texas Child Protective Services sting.

I also chose Robert’s article because of the newsworthy factors, such as impact & proximity.  Robert’s also masters the art of reporting the facts consicely yet, still having an article which reads like a story.

Furthermore, she has a strong grasp on how to use quotes besides placing said at the end of the sentence.  Roberts properly attributes all of her facts in the story,  while also using multiple sources.  Her sources included people and documents.

Roberts also provided a through overview of all parties involved such as: government officials, the church, and the workers helping to remove the girls.

Roberts provided an informative and concise example of journalism writing on the national level.  In addition, her use of diction and the sentence structure of her article also added to the overarching and consistent flow of the piece.

I am also going to comment on an article in the April 3 edition of the Stetson Reporter.  The article, Stetson’s Needed Community Forum, was about the “discussion” that occured in February and in March.  It is now April.  I do not believe that this article is relevant or newsworthy.  It just seemed like something to take up space. 

The entire first paragraph is a recap of the events that have taken place on campus, well the suicides.  So, you would think that would be what the entire article is about.  Then it goes into how poorly Stetson handled these situations.  Haven’t we already seen these issues in the Reporter before?

It was a rehash of issues we have read over and over.  Finally, in the 5th paragraph, Julie Antos, discusses the paper wall.  Now, I believe the news should have been how many people wrote on the wall and how few showed up to the discussion.  Was it “needed” as the headline portrays?

The article had one quote from the discussion in Feb, but it was about the point of the wall.  What in the world is the news in this story?  Antos does not discuss what went on at the “needed” forum.  I just feel like something more newsworthy could have been covered in the Reporter.

The journalists covering the Auburn University killing story for the Atlantic Journal Constitution did a quality job gathering sources that covered all the facts. Even when some sources did not yield information, measures were taken to ensure that at least mention of the missing facts were present. Lauren Burk, an 18-year old student, was murdered last Tuesday by Courtney Larrell Lockhart. The suspects mother claims that 16 month service in Iraq has changed her son, hoping that information might mitigate the judgments her son will be facing.

The byline of this article shows that this story was a collective effort utilizing other  reports as well as numerous journalists from the AJC.  This probably explains the thoroughness of the information gathered. The basic information of the events are at the beginning. The 5 W’s and the H are answered within the first handful of paragraphs including the events that supervened the murder that eventually led to his arrest: car jacking and robbery in a Newnan Wal-Mart. Within the first paragraphs, however, additional information is brought to light that sparked, as it should have, more journalistic investigation.

Firstly, mention of the suspects mother apologizing to the victim’s family is the precursor which yielded the claim that Lockharts military service is to blame for his inimical actions. This inspired the search of character witnesses that knew the suspect before his military service which can be found several more paragraphs down. Sources included neighbors who knew him when he was younger. Lockhart’s character was evinced with more information regarding his dishonorable discharge from the army after “punching a sergeant.”

Police investigators were also interviewed from Newnan, who were on the look out for Lockhart after his robbery and car jacking at a local Wal Mart. His military record was looked up, but that did not yield any crucial evidence, though there is a mention that authorities were not releasing his information.

The only sources that I would have liked to have seen interviewed were Auburn University officials describing the exact impact on the campus of the students death, additional safety measures they were planning to initiate, and other relevant, valuable information.  Perhaps a longer journalistic project can come out of all this regarding the Iraq war and it’s effects on military personnel as they are reintegrated back into our society.

Continuing our class discussion of story structure, I found myself editing a story I was reading.  Clifford Krauss’s article on the Energy Challenge was very informative, yet seemed to misuse many of the components of a well written story.  

Krauss first lead readers to believe that they were reading an article about a Texan who became rich off of his wind farm.  In reality, Krauss buried his lead in the third paragraph.  Instead, his  article focused on the Texas state initiative to lead the U.S.  in generating wind power.  Furthermore, he introduced an experts fact without attribution in the seventh paragraph. 

Moreover, Krauss switches the concentration of the article from Texas development to National development of wind energy numerous times without transitions.  Perhaps, the organization of his story can be reorganized, over even moved to grouped paragraphs on the same topic. 

Lastly, Krauss randomly drops references to Boone Pickens, who should be referenced as T. Boone Pickens.   Krauss never really connects all his information on Pickens and his investments into one section.  This diverted attention away from the importance of Pickens. 

Krauss fails to identify Pickens as the prominent tycoon who has been a leader in the oil industry, and who know has decided to invest billions of dollars into alternative energy.   This infomation should have been connected to Pickens urgency to gain a monopoly in the new alternative energy market.

This week I decided to comment about not an actual article but more or less a press release that is reported on in a newspaper. Of course any story that relates to colleges catches my eye so I immediately was drawn to a story on the front page of the USAToday web-page on on March 6 that described a situation of a student having an explosive device in his dorm room at University of California.

This was not an actual full article written by a journalist, but it was written more like a press release. There is actually no byline and no attribution to one source at all. The report gives credit to The Sacramento Bee and KTXL-TV for all of the information probably because it is more of a local story than national.

I like this type of article because it is straight to the point and gives you the most important information needed. Even though it was short, it even included quotes from the police involved and a spokesman for the university. An update was included that was written after the first report published. As aforementioned I prefer these articles to long, drawn out ones. I get all the information I need in as little as 5 paragraphs and that is how I believe news, especially breaking news, should be reported.

This may be a little old, but I wanted to do something about ledes in the Reporter and this is the most recent news story on its website. The article is about the minimum wage increase and the effect it has on Stetson financial aid, but I think it focuses on the wrong aspect of the story and buries the interesting stuff.

The lede for this story is: “Minimum wage in the state of Florida was increased by the Federal Government from $6.67 to $6.79. While the increase allows the public to earn more money, the issue of “using up” the financial aid awarded to work study students is becoming more apparent.”

It seems like the most newsworthy part of the story is the second sentence, since it not only affects Stetson students more but is also something they probably don’t know about. In addition to not putting this first, the article doesn’t really go into the issue of the school running out of money. Also, the lede that the story goes with is just a piece of very specific information, which in inverted pyramid style should probably go further into the body.

Here’s my idea for a better lede, after reading the rest of the article: “Stetson work study students will work fewer hours for the same amount of pay this semester after a rise in the state’s minimum wage.”

Also, for some reason this article is called “A Dollar an Hour?” I can’t tell why, since the minimum wage only increases by $0.20 an hour and nowhere does it mention a dollar an hour for anything.
 

I am not sure how I feel about the story of Montclaire State University requiring cell phones for students.  Not just any cell phone, but a specific one, bought through the school!  The article starts out with a narrative lead about Amanda Phillips turning on her GPS in her cell phone while walking to her dorm room at night. 

At first I thought cool, what a great idea.  However, I think the news buried the main idea toward the end.  These phone are mandatory and around $200.00 per semester.  If the kid wants a cool I-phone, forget it, the school wants them to have this Sprint phone.  The plan has 50 peak minutes (which is pretty weak) and some other features.  The main feature is the GPS that students can activate if in trouble or if they are walking alone. 

The story also mentions that not everyone on campus has the cell phone.  Before I knew that it had a large price tag, I wondered why people would not take advantage, however, know I know.  I would still like to know how people are getting by without getting it.  If it is mandatory, are the students without it getting punished somehow?  I would like to get opinions from the other side.   What about the students that think it is ridiculous to have a phone like everyone else and that are being forced to buy one.

 The story also said the beeper goes off just a few times a month.  So, really, there has been no one saved from using this telephone.  Although, maybe it will work one day.  I would also like to know if the students think it is unnecessary since there haven’t been any real uses for the emergency feature.

This started well before the Virginia-Tech shootings, which I think is a great idea.  So many safety features have come out after the fact when it is too late.  I would like to know though, what impacted the school to buy these phones before the massacre occurred?  I think the article has major issues with the writing style.  The important things are buried and there are a lot of questions that they left unanswered.  I actually have read this article in many places.  The first one I read did not contain the information that the phones were mandatory.  So this article contains the most information for the reader. 

Current college students are focused on sharing ideas and protecting the individual right of freedom of religion.  Stephen Prothero, a religious chair at Boston University, found that students in his introductory religious course believed in being non-judgemental.

Prothero, thoroughly identified the concerns and beliefs of college students.  He explained their aversions and how they mix religion with fun.  Prothero believes that students have changed their views in the Millenial Generation,and I agree. 

Prothero blames the ignorance of the church and the religious institutions for not recognizing the youth populace as an important and necessary focus for the future .  

Prothero’s article ” Is religion losing the millennial generation?” is part of a weekly Religion column on the New York Times website. 

I recently read an interesting article in the New York Times Online.   Several issues have been surfacing in the news regarding the global climate as well as the human role in the destruction of the environment.
This article “The Presevation Predicament,”by Cornelia Dean  focused on the management of ecosystems if the Earth were to continue on the same evironmentally destructive plan.
I found that numerous environmentally concerned initiatives have been started in the past 100 years, yet conservation organizations are realizing that it may be more important to turn concerns to other areas and save the resources for future sites.
The Nature Conservancy initiative for climate change is working towards focusing its efforts on 10 percent of habitat types ­­­­such as the freshwater systems, the forests and the grasslands. 

Many of these ecosystems come under question as they transform from grasslands into forests, and the question is raised whether or not to preserve the grassland or to allow the trees to grow. 

The environmental community is hit with uncertainty, however they concisely agree that it is important to focus on balancing the needs of the present and future, while also preserving the natural habitat and species. 

Some scientists have thought that some flora and fauna should be transported to a different ecosystem in an effort to preserve them as their ecosystems are undergoing changes.  They call this action, “assisted migration”. 

The scientists in this article are taking a step in the right direction by recognizing their assets and using modern knowledge and future uncertainty to protect as many of the world’s ecosystems as possible. 

The idea that they must pick and choose which ecosystems to preserve is still upsetting since more money should be given to global concerns, which impact every species on the planet.