There have been two times in my career so far where I've approached a subject who was on the verge of tears in a state of confusion and asked them if they would talk on camera.
The first time, I met a man and his two friends in an empty softball field. It turned out, he was intimately connected (though innocent himself) to a major child molestation case we had around here. He brought along documentary evidence which proved beyond a shadow of a doubt the authenticity of his story. And as he related his story to me, he could barely get words through the tears that ran down his face. I asked him if he would go on camera, either his face or us shooting his feet, and he wouldn't say yes or no to me.
At the same time, my absolutely wonderful photog at the time was on the phone buying me time with my station that without a doubt wanted me to get an exclusive interview at all costs. Now I could have simply walked up with the camera and pushed the microphone in his face, and I doubt he would have objected. But I remembered that he is a human being who had clearly been through a traumatic event, and though it may be easy for those of us in news to appear on camera, the potential for retribution or unwanted fallout that can happen to our subjects should always be considered. Due to the nature of his connection to the events, I wanted to make sure he decided for himself, and not under duress, that he wanted to participate in the segment. So after hearing his story and still getting exclusive pictures he had brought on CD that nobody else had, I told him to think about it that night and call me in the morning.
I spoke with him the next day, and after talking about the matter with his wife, they decided that it was safer for their family to stay out of the matter and let the authorities deal with the situation. As a journalist, I was disappointed that I wasn't going to get an exclusive interview from a person no other reporter even knew existed on a significantly newsworthy event. But as a human being, I thought I had done the right thing and not taken advantage of the man's state of vulnerability to advance a news story. I'm not so sure others shared my thought process.
The second time, I was speaking with a soldier's wife who had been going through some tough news that her husband, despite health problems, had been assigned for another tour of duty overseas. She had just heard the news and was clearly shaken by the thought of her husband being away and in a dangerous situation when she felt his health problems hadn't been properly resolved. I sat down with her to begin the interview, but turned the camera off after a few minutes when she couldn't finish a sentence without a valiant attempt to hold back tears. I told her to just start talking and tell me how she was feeling and what their family was going through in an attempt to jumpstart a stream of consciousness that would hopefully calm her down and allow her to talk about the issue more comfortably. After an hour, her husband came to meet her and I decided to give her a day to calm down and let the news sink in so she would be comfortable with the idea of speaking on camera. I called the next business day to see if her and her husband still wanted to talk. After discussing amongst themselves, they decided they wanted to put off talking to the media until they felt they had exhausted other avenues of persuading the military before applying pressure on them through the media. Once again, I felt the disappointment that my story fell through, but glad that I had not taken advantage of a subject in a vulnerable state.
Looking back at these two situations, I still think I did the right thing but I'm not so ironclad about my decision as I used to be. In a situation you know to be ripe with potential consequences for a subject who has just witnessed a traumatic event and is in a highly suggestive state, is it right to coerce them into an interview knowing you'd get an exclusive before anyone else? Is that just the way of the business, or is that the path that will inevitably lead me towards the dark side of journalism.
Though I feel I have a lot of introspection on the matter before developing any sort of rule of thumb, my heart tells me I did the right thing in erring towards respecting a source rather than scooping the competition. If you show compassion and respect for your sources, it might not always pan out immediately but the trust gained from the situation may give you an even better exclusive down the road.
Questions
|
* Why is it OK for national shows like "60 Minutes" to do segments that are longer than 1:30, but it's not OK for local news?
* Why is commentary allowed on shows like Bob Schieffer or even local big-market stations, but ruled out for use in other local markets?
* Why do some stations feature the top ten movies of the week, but neglect to mention top iTunes downloads?
* Why, at some stations, is healthy discussion over important and compelling local events between anchors and guests as part of the newscast completely ruled out for inclusion?
* Why do markets outside the top 50 or so rely upon hand-written Nielsen diaries filled out by a sample size of less than 1% of the population to set ratings and thus advertising rates? More importantly, is there an age shift from this definitively non-random sub-set of the population? When Nielsen ratings shift from hand-written diaries to set top box information (which is a more accurate determination of actual viewers), will stations be in a rude awakening to see how many young viewers they actually have?
(more to come...)
* Why is commentary allowed on shows like Bob Schieffer or even local big-market stations, but ruled out for use in other local markets?
* Why do some stations feature the top ten movies of the week, but neglect to mention top iTunes downloads?
* Why, at some stations, is healthy discussion over important and compelling local events between anchors and guests as part of the newscast completely ruled out for inclusion?
* Why do markets outside the top 50 or so rely upon hand-written Nielsen diaries filled out by a sample size of less than 1% of the population to set ratings and thus advertising rates? More importantly, is there an age shift from this definitively non-random sub-set of the population? When Nielsen ratings shift from hand-written diaries to set top box information (which is a more accurate determination of actual viewers), will stations be in a rude awakening to see how many young viewers they actually have?
(more to come...)
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
A Quick Beatcheck Tip
|
Labels:
interns
Speaking with a communications person at our local police today, I came across some valuable information.
When making your beatchecks, asking "Hey, is there anything going on today?" is in most cases a complete waste of time. I was informed today that our local PD is trained to simply say "Everything's about normal today" regardless of anything going on that's sub-apocalypse level of importance. But, if you're listening to the scanner and have one nugget of information, if you start with "Hey we're hearing on the scanner there's a robbery in progress, do you know where the address is?" then you'll get some concrete information.
Of course, if you're making your regular beatchecks and are trying to be friendly with local dispatch, you might be able to get that information anyways if you're friendly with them. I know an overnight producer who had no PIO to rely upon for breaking news, and the constant communication between her and local dispatches allowed her to get more information from dispatch than they generally release. It's probably been repeated to death, but when making beatcheck calls, be friendly, try to sneak in a question about their day or anything beyond "Anything going on? No? OK thanks bye!".
To recap, if there's a robbery going on in your town, the quick call to local PD can go two different ways.
"Hey, is there anything going on right now?"
"Everything's within normal."
"OK, thanks!"
OR......
"Hey, I heard on the scanner that there's a robbery in progress in Temple, do you have the address?"
"Yes, hold on... It's on the 3700 block of ____ Street, units are on scene."
"OK, Thanks!"
I'm not sure if this is how every PD in a mid-sized town works, but I was shocked when he said how many other news stations ask him that question when he knows he can't volunteer indiscriminate information and that he's been trained to simply reply "Everything's normal" regardless of what the current situation is.
Just a quick tip I thought I'd pass on.
When making your beatchecks, asking "Hey, is there anything going on today?" is in most cases a complete waste of time. I was informed today that our local PD is trained to simply say "Everything's about normal today" regardless of anything going on that's sub-apocalypse level of importance. But, if you're listening to the scanner and have one nugget of information, if you start with "Hey we're hearing on the scanner there's a robbery in progress, do you know where the address is?" then you'll get some concrete information.
Of course, if you're making your regular beatchecks and are trying to be friendly with local dispatch, you might be able to get that information anyways if you're friendly with them. I know an overnight producer who had no PIO to rely upon for breaking news, and the constant communication between her and local dispatches allowed her to get more information from dispatch than they generally release. It's probably been repeated to death, but when making beatcheck calls, be friendly, try to sneak in a question about their day or anything beyond "Anything going on? No? OK thanks bye!".
To recap, if there's a robbery going on in your town, the quick call to local PD can go two different ways.
"Hey, is there anything going on right now?"
"Everything's within normal."
"OK, thanks!"
OR......
"Hey, I heard on the scanner that there's a robbery in progress in Temple, do you have the address?"
"Yes, hold on... It's on the 3700 block of ____ Street, units are on scene."
"OK, Thanks!"
I'm not sure if this is how every PD in a mid-sized town works, but I was shocked when he said how many other news stations ask him that question when he knows he can't volunteer indiscriminate information and that he's been trained to simply reply "Everything's normal" regardless of what the current situation is.
Just a quick tip I thought I'd pass on.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Chipping Away at the Top
|
Labels:
industry
From The Economist:
Extra Credit Question: How is the above relevant to broadcast news?
Technology hasn't just changed the demand for newspapers, it's also changed the supply of information. News used to be an oligopolistic business, now it's just about perfectly competitive. Barriers to entry are minimal, and plenty of suppliers are happy to provide content at next to nothing. That's a recipe for a big drop in price, and any organisation built on market power and rents is sure to fail in such an environment.
Does this mean that news, as a business, is dead? Not necessarily. Some papers will survive by selling things other than news—reputation, say, or exclusivity. Others will hang on until the print market shrinks enough that profitability is possible for a handful (or fewer) of national papers. Survivors in both groups are also likely to capitalise on the demand for news products that remain scarce—especially investigative reporting.
Extra Credit Question: How is the above relevant to broadcast news?
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Live Shots - Breaking Through the Wall
|
Labels:
interns
It's only 10-15 seconds. It's only a few main points. It's only you looking into a little black lens. Easy, right?
For some reason, it's much harder than that. Take out the "umm", "you know", pauses, slang, informal speech, keep your eyes on the camera, don't look down unless you have to, ignore the scene behind you which may or may not consist of bystanders trying to mess you up or get their 15 seconds on TV, and whatever you do, keep talking and don't stop to think.
Now some people are naturals on TV, going live their first time like their last job was the host of the Emmy's. Others have been in the business for years, and still sound like they're a substitute teacher for a high school algebra class. For the majority of us, we start off somewhere in between.
From talking to other people as well as from my own experience, it takes about 3-4 months of regular on-air experience before your live presence is solid. There will be hiccups, embarrassing live shots, and moments where you want to throw your paper down and put your coat over your head afterwards (just make sure your photog doesn't zoom in on you so that the control room can record it and play ad infinitum). But from these experiences, your comfort level will rise and the wall of fear that hit you the first time will slowly fade with every live shot. For me, it's been 6 months and a while since I've had that dread experience where I hear "Kevin Davis joins us from the newsroom with more, Kevin?" and the words I had practiced just suck right out of my head. But that doesn't mean I'm not prone to error either, as the impetus for this post was a horrible live shot I did just last week where I paused and had to look down on my paper to see what I was saying.
When you first start out, try to keep your intros and tag-outs short. In the beginning, it's much easier to introduce a package with a quick sentence then to try for a 30-second intro. Just put that information you were going to do live into the package. Start with short introductions and work yourself up to longer and more detailed intros when you get more comfortable on camera.
Read over what you wrote, and make sure it's natural for you to speak it as well as it was written. If you're in an extremely breaking news situation, it's sometimes better to write the most important facts in bullet point and read off that rather than meticulously constructing each sentence.
Speak with authority, but try not to get all Kent Brockman about it either. There's a middle ground between the monotonous dead-pan style of PBS and the uber-cheesy inflection of tabloid shows like Access Hollywood. Watch network anchors like Campbell Brown and Mika Brzezinski, both of whom are very good at sounding authoritative while being conversational at the same time.
Whatever you do, don't get frustrated. If your live shot goes bad, just start practicing a little bit earlier the next day. Look forward to your next live appearance as an opportunity for redemption.
For me, it's been 6 months and I'm still learning. I no longer fear going live. Instead, I now look forward to the adrenaline rush. I don't think that slight nervousness before a live shot will ever go away, I've just tried to harness that energy. I've come a long way since the beginning but I still have room to grow before my station can throw me at a huge breaking news story minutes before a live hit where I'm expected to flawlessly ad-lib off the top of my head the details of the story in narrative structure rather than just a fact-by-fact recount.
But I'll be there soon, and you will be too if you aren't already there. Practice makes perfect!
For some reason, it's much harder than that. Take out the "umm", "you know", pauses, slang, informal speech, keep your eyes on the camera, don't look down unless you have to, ignore the scene behind you which may or may not consist of bystanders trying to mess you up or get their 15 seconds on TV, and whatever you do, keep talking and don't stop to think.
Now some people are naturals on TV, going live their first time like their last job was the host of the Emmy's. Others have been in the business for years, and still sound like they're a substitute teacher for a high school algebra class. For the majority of us, we start off somewhere in between.
From talking to other people as well as from my own experience, it takes about 3-4 months of regular on-air experience before your live presence is solid. There will be hiccups, embarrassing live shots, and moments where you want to throw your paper down and put your coat over your head afterwards (just make sure your photog doesn't zoom in on you so that the control room can record it and play ad infinitum). But from these experiences, your comfort level will rise and the wall of fear that hit you the first time will slowly fade with every live shot. For me, it's been 6 months and a while since I've had that dread experience where I hear "Kevin Davis joins us from the newsroom with more, Kevin?" and the words I had practiced just suck right out of my head. But that doesn't mean I'm not prone to error either, as the impetus for this post was a horrible live shot I did just last week where I paused and had to look down on my paper to see what I was saying.
When you first start out, try to keep your intros and tag-outs short. In the beginning, it's much easier to introduce a package with a quick sentence then to try for a 30-second intro. Just put that information you were going to do live into the package. Start with short introductions and work yourself up to longer and more detailed intros when you get more comfortable on camera.
Read over what you wrote, and make sure it's natural for you to speak it as well as it was written. If you're in an extremely breaking news situation, it's sometimes better to write the most important facts in bullet point and read off that rather than meticulously constructing each sentence.
Speak with authority, but try not to get all Kent Brockman about it either. There's a middle ground between the monotonous dead-pan style of PBS and the uber-cheesy inflection of tabloid shows like Access Hollywood. Watch network anchors like Campbell Brown and Mika Brzezinski, both of whom are very good at sounding authoritative while being conversational at the same time.
Whatever you do, don't get frustrated. If your live shot goes bad, just start practicing a little bit earlier the next day. Look forward to your next live appearance as an opportunity for redemption.
For me, it's been 6 months and I'm still learning. I no longer fear going live. Instead, I now look forward to the adrenaline rush. I don't think that slight nervousness before a live shot will ever go away, I've just tried to harness that energy. I've come a long way since the beginning but I still have room to grow before my station can throw me at a huge breaking news story minutes before a live hit where I'm expected to flawlessly ad-lib off the top of my head the details of the story in narrative structure rather than just a fact-by-fact recount.
But I'll be there soon, and you will be too if you aren't already there. Practice makes perfect!
Monday, December 8, 2008
Don't Sweat the Small Stuff
|
Labels:
commentary
When you're on TV, it just goes along with the job that you're putting yourself up for criticism. People who have never touched a microphone, never gathered sources, never raced to a live shot to gather information minutes before a live hit will tell you with absolute certainty every minute detail that you did wrong. From your presentation, your presence on-air, your sentence construction, choice of phrases, camera shots, etc. all these are fair game.
I don't bring this up to stir anger, resentment, or any other feelings of ill will, as I honestly don't feel any of these things. The only reason why I've progressed since my first day is from valuable constructive criticism I've received from my co-workers. But just know, it takes a thick skin to be the face on TV.
The key is to find the balance between how others see you and you see yourself. Take criticism, even when it's hardly constructive, but don't always accede to criticism that doesn't ring true. Gauge your stories by your intuition, think about what you did correctly, and what you can work on to improve. Ignore the petty smack talk. Incorporate constructive suggestions.
All throughout your career, no matter what field, you will face coworkers who are supportive and those who are less so. The sooner you learn to learn from those with valuable lessons and tune out those who are simply trying to bring you down, the easier your professional life will become.
I don't bring this up to stir anger, resentment, or any other feelings of ill will, as I honestly don't feel any of these things. The only reason why I've progressed since my first day is from valuable constructive criticism I've received from my co-workers. But just know, it takes a thick skin to be the face on TV.
The key is to find the balance between how others see you and you see yourself. Take criticism, even when it's hardly constructive, but don't always accede to criticism that doesn't ring true. Gauge your stories by your intuition, think about what you did correctly, and what you can work on to improve. Ignore the petty smack talk. Incorporate constructive suggestions.
All throughout your career, no matter what field, you will face coworkers who are supportive and those who are less so. The sooner you learn to learn from those with valuable lessons and tune out those who are simply trying to bring you down, the easier your professional life will become.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Internet vs. TV News
|
Labels:
industry
From MediaBistro's TVNewser:
A Zogby Poll, commissioned by IFC, found 37.6% of those asked consider the Internets the most reliable source of news. 20.3% consider national TV news most reliable and 16% say radio is the most reliable source.
Friday, November 21, 2008
"Don't get into news if you want to save the world" = B.S.
|
Labels:
commentary
No, I'm not advocating that somehow getting into broadcast news will give you superpowers to cure the world's ills nor am I injecting braggadoccio into a profession that is ill-suited to serve as the healer of mankind.
But I'm just plain sick of hearing this line from those with decades of experience in the field as if it's some pithy expression whose speaker believes is a clever way to knock the idealism out of j-school students.
The phrase undercuts the very real ability for news to do something positive. News will never "save the world." Even being the president of the United States will not give you the ability to "save the world." But being a broadcast reporter gives you the power of the microphone, and that power can be used now and then to make small but positive differences. I've done stories on hurricane evacuees who would not have had enough gas money to get home if it hadn't been for our extremely generous viewers contributing to a cause. A positive difference doesn't even have to be monetary; I covered a woman whose side had been left out of a news report from another reporter the day before, and she was so grateful that her side had been told. Our station did a story on a local military post involving a woman being harassed with a noose hanging around a tree outside her house. After the report aired, the military post upped their security around the area, held a town hall to address citizens concerns, and as a result made the entire area safer.
Now I'm not trying to brag about any individual or station accomplishments, I'm just trying to say that in my short time in broadcast, I've had the wonderful opportunity to cover stories that made a positive difference in the subjects' lives.
To say "Don't get into news if you want to save the world" is a statement of cowardice and jaded cynicism, nothing more. The primary function of news is to illuminate and inform your viewers rather than act as a force of goodwill, but it still doesn't mean these two concepts are mutually exclusive.
But I'm just plain sick of hearing this line from those with decades of experience in the field as if it's some pithy expression whose speaker believes is a clever way to knock the idealism out of j-school students.
The phrase undercuts the very real ability for news to do something positive. News will never "save the world." Even being the president of the United States will not give you the ability to "save the world." But being a broadcast reporter gives you the power of the microphone, and that power can be used now and then to make small but positive differences. I've done stories on hurricane evacuees who would not have had enough gas money to get home if it hadn't been for our extremely generous viewers contributing to a cause. A positive difference doesn't even have to be monetary; I covered a woman whose side had been left out of a news report from another reporter the day before, and she was so grateful that her side had been told. Our station did a story on a local military post involving a woman being harassed with a noose hanging around a tree outside her house. After the report aired, the military post upped their security around the area, held a town hall to address citizens concerns, and as a result made the entire area safer.
Now I'm not trying to brag about any individual or station accomplishments, I'm just trying to say that in my short time in broadcast, I've had the wonderful opportunity to cover stories that made a positive difference in the subjects' lives.
To say "Don't get into news if you want to save the world" is a statement of cowardice and jaded cynicism, nothing more. The primary function of news is to illuminate and inform your viewers rather than act as a force of goodwill, but it still doesn't mean these two concepts are mutually exclusive.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
iPhone: How I Love Thee
|
Labels:
interns
Disclaimer: I am not in any way receiving any sort of compensation from Apple for this post. I just want to marry my iPhone, have its children, and worship it like the all-knowing all-powerful deity it truly is.
For the first month of my job, I had a RAZR. I had to write down phone numbers on a beatcheck list on my computer and print it out for me. I had to scroll endlessly through my contacts (and their multiple cell/work/dayside/nightside numbers) just to find the person I'm looking for. Work would send me emails of press releases, story info, etc. that I wasn't able to get on the road.
And then everything changed.
When I bought my iPhone 3G and activated it for the first time, I was in awe. But a month later after using it on the job, the difference was like night and day.
Basically, the iPhone is the best thing eveeeeeer to happen to local reporters. Why?
- GPS. If your station hasn't equipped every car with a GPS, this sure beats the hell out of using a Mapsco or any other mapbook when you need to find something quickly. Of course, it's only about 90% accurate so there will be the occasional hiccup, but I can't imagine going back to using a mapsco, especially in breaking news situations or when your directions are "the Walmart in Anytown" and you don't have a specific address.
- Email. I had to let my station know that sending important emails during work was basically useless, as I might be out on a story or just searching for one. Now, I depend on email, and if I need info for a story or results from the archive, I can have a producer email me on the road. Of course, the Blackberry series or other email-capable phones are just as good if not better in some cases, but I love the iPhone's clean mail interface. But the best thing about email?
- Writing scripts. Normally, reporters on a live shot who aren't connected through ENPS/QSeries or other news software have to write their stories on a notepad, then either dictate the entire story to the producer over the phone, or just give in-cues and out-cues and when to take a soundbyte if there's not enough time. Now, I write my scripts on the iPhone (and yes it's totally easy with the type interface), email it directly to the producer once I'm done, and then read off the phone during my live shot. Easy as pie. Of course, if you do this, you might want to put a notepad in front so it doesn't look like you're checking your cellphone for a booty call text while your live shot is going on... and make sure to turn on Airplane mode so that you don't get a call while you're reading your script off the phone. That, would suck.
- Logging soundbytes. Same as above. Instead of writing on a piece of paper your timecodes and soundbyte transcriptions then retyping it later, you can just type it to your iPhone, then email it to yourself when you're done. It's much easier this way, and it could save valuable minutes in a crunch.
- Internet. Not the mobile Internet, but real Internet. I can check city council websites, lookup personal information on Anywho.com, find background information on a subject while I'm on the road, browse the competition's websites to see if they have something we don't, and much more.
- Extremely Breaking News. We had a huge fire one time right before the newscast, and our live truck was out of commission. To send another truck would have taken at least 45 minutes. Instead, I took a bunch of pictures from my iPhone and emailed them to the graphics department during the show, where they used the photos as b-roll when I did a live phoner from the scene. Two other stations (photogs only, it was late) and the local paper were there. No one went live with the story except for us.
- Picking up Girls. Just kidding :)
Basically, if you have the money for an iPhone and you're a reporter or looking for your first job, I can't adequately express in words how much the iPhone makes this job easier. And when you start to have hundreds of contacts in your phone, some of whom might have mobile/fax/work/pager/etc., you'll be thanking yourself.
Believe me.
For the first month of my job, I had a RAZR. I had to write down phone numbers on a beatcheck list on my computer and print it out for me. I had to scroll endlessly through my contacts (and their multiple cell/work/dayside/nightside numbers) just to find the person I'm looking for. Work would send me emails of press releases, story info, etc. that I wasn't able to get on the road.
And then everything changed.
When I bought my iPhone 3G and activated it for the first time, I was in awe. But a month later after using it on the job, the difference was like night and day.
Basically, the iPhone is the best thing eveeeeeer to happen to local reporters. Why?
- GPS. If your station hasn't equipped every car with a GPS, this sure beats the hell out of using a Mapsco or any other mapbook when you need to find something quickly. Of course, it's only about 90% accurate so there will be the occasional hiccup, but I can't imagine going back to using a mapsco, especially in breaking news situations or when your directions are "the Walmart in Anytown" and you don't have a specific address.
- Email. I had to let my station know that sending important emails during work was basically useless, as I might be out on a story or just searching for one. Now, I depend on email, and if I need info for a story or results from the archive, I can have a producer email me on the road. Of course, the Blackberry series or other email-capable phones are just as good if not better in some cases, but I love the iPhone's clean mail interface. But the best thing about email?
- Writing scripts. Normally, reporters on a live shot who aren't connected through ENPS/QSeries or other news software have to write their stories on a notepad, then either dictate the entire story to the producer over the phone, or just give in-cues and out-cues and when to take a soundbyte if there's not enough time. Now, I write my scripts on the iPhone (and yes it's totally easy with the type interface), email it directly to the producer once I'm done, and then read off the phone during my live shot. Easy as pie. Of course, if you do this, you might want to put a notepad in front so it doesn't look like you're checking your cellphone for a booty call text while your live shot is going on... and make sure to turn on Airplane mode so that you don't get a call while you're reading your script off the phone. That, would suck.
- Logging soundbytes. Same as above. Instead of writing on a piece of paper your timecodes and soundbyte transcriptions then retyping it later, you can just type it to your iPhone, then email it to yourself when you're done. It's much easier this way, and it could save valuable minutes in a crunch.
- Internet. Not the mobile Internet, but real Internet. I can check city council websites, lookup personal information on Anywho.com, find background information on a subject while I'm on the road, browse the competition's websites to see if they have something we don't, and much more.
- Extremely Breaking News. We had a huge fire one time right before the newscast, and our live truck was out of commission. To send another truck would have taken at least 45 minutes. Instead, I took a bunch of pictures from my iPhone and emailed them to the graphics department during the show, where they used the photos as b-roll when I did a live phoner from the scene. Two other stations (photogs only, it was late) and the local paper were there. No one went live with the story except for us.
- Picking up Girls. Just kidding :)
Basically, if you have the money for an iPhone and you're a reporter or looking for your first job, I can't adequately express in words how much the iPhone makes this job easier. And when you start to have hundreds of contacts in your phone, some of whom might have mobile/fax/work/pager/etc., you'll be thanking yourself.
Believe me.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Yikes pt.2
|
Labels:
industry
From the New York Times:
Maybe if news stations would start viewing their online presences as their primary mode of distribution and not secondary to its television broadcasting, they wouldn't be siphoning off viewers to their Internet competition so quickly. I'm not saying remove anything from the television end of distribution, but approach it with the mindset that within five to ten years it's entirely possible that online viewing will surpass television viewing. That's really not that crazy of a prediction with 19% of households that watch tv online (doubling within two years), Tina Fey's Palin impression returning relevancy to SNL (only 1/3rd of the audience viewed it live), and even NBC learning from its online experience.
But with local news websites mainly consisting of poor graphic design, poor layouts, content management systems that only allow images up to 180px (are you kidding me?), more garish advertisements, pop-ups, flash ads, etc, it's not a surprise that we are losing the opportunity to create unique daily pageviews.
I'll be posting soon on my take about local news's inept ability to achieve a competitive internet presence.
In a move intended to save money in the economically pressed business of local television news, two stations in Philadelphia owned by NBC and Fox are combining some of their video operations with a plan to provide the service to all the stations owned by each company.
...
Local television stations have experienced sharp decreases in their profit margins as the Internet has cut into their reach with local viewers and many reliable local advertisers, like auto dealers, have been in a severe downturn.
“It’s a tough operating environment,” said John Wallace, the president of NBC Local Media, “This is about cost savings, but it’s also about being smart about local television news.”
Maybe if news stations would start viewing their online presences as their primary mode of distribution and not secondary to its television broadcasting, they wouldn't be siphoning off viewers to their Internet competition so quickly. I'm not saying remove anything from the television end of distribution, but approach it with the mindset that within five to ten years it's entirely possible that online viewing will surpass television viewing. That's really not that crazy of a prediction with 19% of households that watch tv online (doubling within two years), Tina Fey's Palin impression returning relevancy to SNL (only 1/3rd of the audience viewed it live), and even NBC learning from its online experience.
But with local news websites mainly consisting of poor graphic design, poor layouts, content management systems that only allow images up to 180px (are you kidding me?), more garish advertisements, pop-ups, flash ads, etc, it's not a surprise that we are losing the opportunity to create unique daily pageviews.
I'll be posting soon on my take about local news's inept ability to achieve a competitive internet presence.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Yikes
|
Labels:
industry
From the New York Times "TV Decoder" section:
The bottom seems to be falling out of local broadcast television advertising sales, according to a report that came out on Tuesday.
In the report, the trade association for TV stations, the Television Bureau of Advertising, revised significantly downward its previous forecasts for results in 2009 as well as for this year. The updates come only two months after the bureau issued its predictions.
...
“These are not happy numbers to report,” Chris Rohrs, president at the bureau, said in a statement, “but they are the new reality.” The “unprecedented economic developments” since the summer led the association to reconsider the previous forecasts, he added.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Where Do Stories Come From?
|
Labels:
interns
Probably the most frequent question I hear from friends who aren't in the news business and interns looking to jump into the news business, is where reporters get their stories from.
Mainly, there are press releases and then there's real reporting. Businesses, charities, city governments, and sometimes crazy people bombard the assignment desk and reporters with info on a latest product, charity dinner invitations, city council agendas to try and get positive coverage for their organization. Press releases are (hopefully) rarely used for a story of the day, unless it's about massive layoffs, a major political rally, or another significant event. At some stations, you will find reporters simply parroting press releases and choosing which release they want to cover for the day. I highly suggest against this method of reporting, as it's the lowest effort to find a story and most likely if it's significant, all the other stations will be covering the same story.
Breaking news is easy. Keep the scanners on, listen for excited voices, a call for all units, the mention of flames, etc.
But for those days where you have to find something else, the trick is to keep your eyes and ears open at all times. I know it sounds like a blindingly obvious statement, but it's paying attention at all times, during another story, at home, keeping lines of communication with community leaders open, and most importantly the realization that at any moment you could hear a tiny little piece of information, maybe a passing remark, that could be your next story.
I was on a story about Hurricane Ike evacuees staying at a local shelter when I ran into a health inspector I had talked to a few times in the past. He was there to make sure the kitchen was clean and that the food was OK to serve. I chatted him up for a few minutes after he was done, and he ended up telling me he had been busier than usual the last month because he had closed down several restaurants for health violations. He told me that the closures were for things that could have easily been prevented had the business spent just a bit more money, and speculated that it could be related to the recent downturn in the economy.
Ding. There was a future story. I asked him when he would be free in the next few days, and went from there. A story can hit you anytime, anyplace, and you have to make sure when you hear something interesting to ask questions, write down a phone #, setup a future interview, and chase your next story by the tail.
The classic wisdom that news directors will give you is to find out the place where the cops go when they get off their shift, and go hang out with them. For our generation who grew up with the Internet, we can apply this advice and find places where people discuss their city online, and for that there's no better place than online messageboards. For example, residents of one city in our coverage area use the website Topix.com frequently to "discuss" issues that their city is dealing with (though like all Internet messageboards discussions can sometimes degrade into petty trolling). When you have some downtime, start Googling a city within your beat and see if you can find online discussion forums where a lot of people are posting about issues with their city. I've spent hours just reading arguments back and forth about cities in my coverage area, and though the signal-to-noise ratio was low sometimes, it gave me some good ideas on where to look for a new story, as well as insight on how people feel about what goes on in their city.
For crime stories, check out the local county jail listings (ask around if there's a website that displays updated inmate information along with charges and bond info). Look for inmates recently checked in with bonds over $100,000, charges of murder or aggrevated assault, illegal gambling, endangerment of a child, theft in excess of a large amount, anything that sets them apart from the multitude of DUI's, petty thefts, and misdemeanors. Get the inmate's first and last name and call the associated police department to find out more information about the inmate. If you can, check the local Justice of the Peace or municipal court for the complaint affidavit which will have the officer's description of what happened. You might have to wait until the inmate has been arraigned for the complaint affidavit to be released. See if neighbors of the suspect's listed address will talk or give you more information. Look up info of any names related in the case on anywho.com or any similar public search listing. This is (in my experience) the quickest way to get information on crime suspects before press releases are issued by police on interesting subjects. These releases might come at the end of a business day, and are typically addressed to all your competitors as well as you. If you are checking the inmate list on a regular basis, you'll be able to beat your competition before the release comes out. Make friends with the PIO or anyone else at the police station. Ask them details about a case if you can't find the complaint affidavit yet.
For school stories, make friends with the PIO. Keep in mind, schools can't comment on a lot of matters by law, so try not to simply call them up on a controversial matter, ask them a question you know they can't answer, and call that "getting both sides." Work with them. Explain to whoever you are talking with that you want to make sure they are given a fair shake, and if they can't give you a statement or comment on a case, ask them if they can refer you to someone else who can. They won't be able to give out personal information 99% of the time, so ask if you can give them your cell or other contact info, and pass it along to the other party in case they do want their side to be heard. It's entirely easy to do a school story that makes them look bad as they are basically muzzled on a lot of issues. It's much tougher to do the right story and work with them to try and give them a fair shake.
Of course, the most important thing is to keep meeting people. Try to add one new phone number to your Rolodex/iPhone/Outlook/Google Contacts/etc. every day, even if it means cold calling a local city official, health inspector, DPS, police, political organization (especially during elections), etc. You need to be connected to the various groups that make up a city and be on a first name basis with a point of contact at each group. If you become friendly enough with them, they will be more open to giving you information earlier and possibly letting you scoop a major event if they feel they can trust your coverage.
Be friendly. If you don't have the gift of gab, this probably isn't the right job for you. Don't approach a subject with the single intention of getting two or three soundbytes so you can go back and write your PKG before your live shot. If there's free time, just shoot the breeze with them. Ask them how long they've been doing their job, if they like it, what their family does, etc. One person who has been very helpful in giving me information off the record said that after being burned by media in the past, she started talking to me but only because she saw the way I talked with a subject that I tried to connect to them in a personal way and not in a cold and fake manner that so many other reporters adopt. It's your ability to turn one-time interview subjects into friends that will best help your ability to get stories no one else will have.
And of course, read all local newspapers, watch your local competition's newscasts, and pay attention to everything that happens in your city. Understanding context and asking deeper questions that aren't necessarily part of your story for the day will enable you to better comprehend ongoing events and to find an angle to a story that no one else has thought of.
Mainly, there are press releases and then there's real reporting. Businesses, charities, city governments, and sometimes crazy people bombard the assignment desk and reporters with info on a latest product, charity dinner invitations, city council agendas to try and get positive coverage for their organization. Press releases are (hopefully) rarely used for a story of the day, unless it's about massive layoffs, a major political rally, or another significant event. At some stations, you will find reporters simply parroting press releases and choosing which release they want to cover for the day. I highly suggest against this method of reporting, as it's the lowest effort to find a story and most likely if it's significant, all the other stations will be covering the same story.
Breaking news is easy. Keep the scanners on, listen for excited voices, a call for all units, the mention of flames, etc.
But for those days where you have to find something else, the trick is to keep your eyes and ears open at all times. I know it sounds like a blindingly obvious statement, but it's paying attention at all times, during another story, at home, keeping lines of communication with community leaders open, and most importantly the realization that at any moment you could hear a tiny little piece of information, maybe a passing remark, that could be your next story.
I was on a story about Hurricane Ike evacuees staying at a local shelter when I ran into a health inspector I had talked to a few times in the past. He was there to make sure the kitchen was clean and that the food was OK to serve. I chatted him up for a few minutes after he was done, and he ended up telling me he had been busier than usual the last month because he had closed down several restaurants for health violations. He told me that the closures were for things that could have easily been prevented had the business spent just a bit more money, and speculated that it could be related to the recent downturn in the economy.
Ding. There was a future story. I asked him when he would be free in the next few days, and went from there. A story can hit you anytime, anyplace, and you have to make sure when you hear something interesting to ask questions, write down a phone #, setup a future interview, and chase your next story by the tail.
The classic wisdom that news directors will give you is to find out the place where the cops go when they get off their shift, and go hang out with them. For our generation who grew up with the Internet, we can apply this advice and find places where people discuss their city online, and for that there's no better place than online messageboards. For example, residents of one city in our coverage area use the website Topix.com frequently to "discuss" issues that their city is dealing with (though like all Internet messageboards discussions can sometimes degrade into petty trolling). When you have some downtime, start Googling a city within your beat and see if you can find online discussion forums where a lot of people are posting about issues with their city. I've spent hours just reading arguments back and forth about cities in my coverage area, and though the signal-to-noise ratio was low sometimes, it gave me some good ideas on where to look for a new story, as well as insight on how people feel about what goes on in their city.
For crime stories, check out the local county jail listings (ask around if there's a website that displays updated inmate information along with charges and bond info). Look for inmates recently checked in with bonds over $100,000, charges of murder or aggrevated assault, illegal gambling, endangerment of a child, theft in excess of a large amount, anything that sets them apart from the multitude of DUI's, petty thefts, and misdemeanors. Get the inmate's first and last name and call the associated police department to find out more information about the inmate. If you can, check the local Justice of the Peace or municipal court for the complaint affidavit which will have the officer's description of what happened. You might have to wait until the inmate has been arraigned for the complaint affidavit to be released. See if neighbors of the suspect's listed address will talk or give you more information. Look up info of any names related in the case on anywho.com or any similar public search listing. This is (in my experience) the quickest way to get information on crime suspects before press releases are issued by police on interesting subjects. These releases might come at the end of a business day, and are typically addressed to all your competitors as well as you. If you are checking the inmate list on a regular basis, you'll be able to beat your competition before the release comes out. Make friends with the PIO or anyone else at the police station. Ask them details about a case if you can't find the complaint affidavit yet.
For school stories, make friends with the PIO. Keep in mind, schools can't comment on a lot of matters by law, so try not to simply call them up on a controversial matter, ask them a question you know they can't answer, and call that "getting both sides." Work with them. Explain to whoever you are talking with that you want to make sure they are given a fair shake, and if they can't give you a statement or comment on a case, ask them if they can refer you to someone else who can. They won't be able to give out personal information 99% of the time, so ask if you can give them your cell or other contact info, and pass it along to the other party in case they do want their side to be heard. It's entirely easy to do a school story that makes them look bad as they are basically muzzled on a lot of issues. It's much tougher to do the right story and work with them to try and give them a fair shake.
Of course, the most important thing is to keep meeting people. Try to add one new phone number to your Rolodex/iPhone/Outlook/Google Contacts/etc. every day, even if it means cold calling a local city official, health inspector, DPS, police, political organization (especially during elections), etc. You need to be connected to the various groups that make up a city and be on a first name basis with a point of contact at each group. If you become friendly enough with them, they will be more open to giving you information earlier and possibly letting you scoop a major event if they feel they can trust your coverage.
Be friendly. If you don't have the gift of gab, this probably isn't the right job for you. Don't approach a subject with the single intention of getting two or three soundbytes so you can go back and write your PKG before your live shot. If there's free time, just shoot the breeze with them. Ask them how long they've been doing their job, if they like it, what their family does, etc. One person who has been very helpful in giving me information off the record said that after being burned by media in the past, she started talking to me but only because she saw the way I talked with a subject that I tried to connect to them in a personal way and not in a cold and fake manner that so many other reporters adopt. It's your ability to turn one-time interview subjects into friends that will best help your ability to get stories no one else will have.
And of course, read all local newspapers, watch your local competition's newscasts, and pay attention to everything that happens in your city. Understanding context and asking deeper questions that aren't necessarily part of your story for the day will enable you to better comprehend ongoing events and to find an angle to a story that no one else has thought of.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
