For our final project, we're really looking to tell a "newsy" news story. What defines a real piece of news? Well, one thing we're always looking for is...tension. Are there two (or more) sides to this story...and are they at odds? What are the main issues causing the tension?
Another way to tell a news story is to find a trend. Is something happening in your life, town, community or world, that's part of a larger trend? How is this trend really affecting people?
Within these types of stories, we want to hear some of the following things:
1. The voice of a "real person" - meant to illustrate a trend or idea
2. The voice of a "stakeholder" - an official person whose work affects us all
3. The voice of an "expert" - meant to uncover truths, point to trends, debunk myths
Not all stories will have all of these characters - but a rich mix of the three gives us different insights into the story. Here's a recent story by WNPR's Diane Orson that has a lot of tension...it's about Yale's battle for ancient artifacts with the government of Peru.
Before you start writing a story like this, take a look at a few of these ideas about how to get started, and construct a good story. One is from reporter Melanie Peeples. She talks about "story visioning."
Another is taken from a manifesto by reporter Nancy Updike. She has some unusual methods, but they might help you break through to get a good idea.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Writing the profile, questions for listening...and more
By next week, we want to have our scripts ready for our "profile piece." Here's another listening example that might help give you ideas. It's from the oldest and most common type of profile: The obit. British science fiction novelist Arthur C. Clarke died Tuesday in Sri Lanka, where he lived for more than 50 years. He was 90 years old. NPR's Neda Ulaby reports on his life and career.
As you're listening to this piece - apply this series of listening practices. It's meant not only for editors, but reporters who want to give a self-critical listen as well.
One of the things we want our profile to have is a "scene" - a part of the script where sound can help to tell the story. A place where you're "showing" and not telling. Here's some information on how to "set the scene" in a radio piece.
Lastly, I want to draw your attention to this "statement of ethics" for broadcast reporting. It's important to keep rules like this in mind, when you're doing any story - especially one about an individual. You should always be concerned that your reporting meets some basic guidelines, even when the story isn't thought to be "controversial."
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
"Profile" Example...
Here's a good example of a "profile" piece.
All Things Considered, December 11, 2007 · Yale University law student Isra Bhatty recently won a prestigious Rhodes scholarship.
When she's not hitting the books, Bhatty works as an English-Urdu translator for detainees at Guantanamo Bay. She's also a hip-hop artist and can be seen intercepting passes on a woman's football team — wearing her tye-dyed hijab.
Diane Orson of member station WNPR reports.
A story like this - about a person, or a group of people - includes a few key things:
1. A compelling story. It's not enough for someone just to be nice, or interesting. It's not enough for them to just be doing something "nice." We want to tell an important story that could affect a listener's life. Does someone have a unique experience? How is what they do "different?"
2. A good talker. Your key "stakeholder" in this story is the person you're profiling. What are they likely to talk about? What will they say? What would you like to GET them to say?
3. A thoughtful observer or "expert." A profile story falls apart if all we hear is the person we're profiling talking. We want someone from their life - or someone who knows their work - to give us an outsider's view.
4. A scene. Show this person at work, play or whatever they do. Show them in a setting that's not just a straight interview. The listener will take more away from you "showing" them than you "telling" them...
Write a focus statement for your piece that addresses these issues. Sell me on why it's a good story that listeners will care about. Tell me about the person you're profiling, and what they're likely to say, explain who else will be part of the story, and describe a scene you hope to capture.
All Things Considered, December 11, 2007 · Yale University law student Isra Bhatty recently won a prestigious Rhodes scholarship.
When she's not hitting the books, Bhatty works as an English-Urdu translator for detainees at Guantanamo Bay. She's also a hip-hop artist and can be seen intercepting passes on a woman's football team — wearing her tye-dyed hijab.
Diane Orson of member station WNPR reports.
A story like this - about a person, or a group of people - includes a few key things:
1. A compelling story. It's not enough for someone just to be nice, or interesting. It's not enough for them to just be doing something "nice." We want to tell an important story that could affect a listener's life. Does someone have a unique experience? How is what they do "different?"
2. A good talker. Your key "stakeholder" in this story is the person you're profiling. What are they likely to talk about? What will they say? What would you like to GET them to say?
3. A thoughtful observer or "expert." A profile story falls apart if all we hear is the person we're profiling talking. We want someone from their life - or someone who knows their work - to give us an outsider's view.
4. A scene. Show this person at work, play or whatever they do. Show them in a setting that's not just a straight interview. The listener will take more away from you "showing" them than you "telling" them...
Write a focus statement for your piece that addresses these issues. Sell me on why it's a good story that listeners will care about. Tell me about the person you're profiling, and what they're likely to say, explain who else will be part of the story, and describe a scene you hope to capture.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
In-class writing assignment...Rosa DeLauro Scripter
In class, we're going to be compiling a local newscast - 5 minutes - that will include a few different types of news writing: Wrap, Scripter, Reader. The Wrap is the 1:30 story you did for this week on Chris Shays and the steroid hearings. Yeah, I know, it's not really happening this week...but we'll let that pass.
The Scripter is based on an interview with Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro about problems with the USDA and beef safety. Use this link to hear the audio of the interview, to pull soundbites.
The Readers will fill out the newscast, and will include some of the most recent stories on the wire.
The same rules apply for all of the stories: News on top/background and context/finish by moving the story forward.
For next week, click this link to hear an example of a "profile" story. It doesn't really have any of the "tension" that we're used to hearing in a news story - and it can even be light and "feature-y."
The Scripter is based on an interview with Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro about problems with the USDA and beef safety. Use this link to hear the audio of the interview, to pull soundbites.
The Readers will fill out the newscast, and will include some of the most recent stories on the wire.
The same rules apply for all of the stories: News on top/background and context/finish by moving the story forward.
For next week, click this link to hear an example of a "profile" story. It doesn't really have any of the "tension" that we're used to hearing in a news story - and it can even be light and "feature-y."
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Remote Class on an icy night...Part 2
Hopefully, you're all having fun composing a VOX out of the best election soundbites from the class. Take until 7:30 to put that together...and submit your script as a comment to that blog posting. After that, you're free to go...This second assignment is for next week. It's a "wrap" or "spot" about the Roger Clemens steroid hearings on Capitol Hill today.
Below is the print version of an AP story about the proceedings. Here is a section of the questioning of Brian McNamee by Connecticut Congressman Christopher Shays.
Here's what I want you to do:
Below is the print version of an AP story about the proceedings. Here is a section of the questioning of Brian McNamee by Connecticut Congressman Christopher Shays.
Here's what I want you to do:
1. Write a 1:30 "wrap", using the copy below as the basis for the story, and the tape from the hearing as the soundbite. This story must include a "host introduction" or "host lead." The last line of this lead should be "WNPR's ___________ reports." This lead should include the NEWS of this story...what happened today that was important. Then, your copy should include more news, background, one soundbite (maximum :30) chosen from the tape provided and a close. Your close should move the story forward in some way...what's happening next?
2. You're writing it from the standpoint of a Connecticut radio reporter - for a Connecticut radio audience. So, you'll want to focus on Shays being part of the hearing, as well as Clemens connection to the two local baseball teams, the Yankees and Red Sox.
3. The script format should be like this:
Intro: Blah Blah Blah. WNPR's ________ reports:
Copy: Blah Blah Blah. Some words to identify the speaker in the soundbite.
Cut (Shays): Blah Blah Blah.
Copy: Blah Blah Blah. A fantastic close. For WNPR, I'm ___________.
Sound good?? Bring a hard copy next week...and a digital version to edit.
This story is from the Associated Press:
Under oath and sometimes blistering questioning, Roger Clemens stuck to his story Wednesday. So did his chief accuser and former personal trainer, Brian McNamee. And after a 4 1/2-hour hearing, Congress settled for a draw in the he-said, he-said between the two men over whether the seven-time Cy Young Award winner used performance-enhancing drugs.Ultimately, the matter may be referred to the Justice Department for a resolution -- and, possibly, criminal charges."I haven't reached any conclusions at this point," said California Democrat Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.But, as ranking Republican Tom Davis of Virginia, put it: "Both can't be telling the truth."
Clemens and McNamee, once employer and employee, and by all accounts once friends, sat at the same witness table and rarely, if ever, looked at the other.His reputation and legacy on the line, Clemens gestured toward McNamee with his right arm and said, "I have strong disagreements with what this man says about me."At times, Clemens struggled to find the right words as he was pressed by lawmakers about McNamee's allegations -- told to federal prosecutors and then baseball investigator George Mitchell -- that he injected the pitcher with steroids and human growth hormone from 1998 to 2001. Clemens also was asked about new accounts of drug use made against him by former teammate and pal Andy Pettitte.Using words like "misremembered" and even mispronouncing McNamee's name at one point, Clemens raised his voice toward the end to interrupt Waxman's closing remarks. Waxman pounded his gavel and said, "Excuse me, but this is not your time to argue with me."
It seemed clear nearly from the start that the committee would not treat Clemens with kid gloves, despite all the face-to-face sit-downs he did with representatives in recent days -- sometimes posing for photos or signing autographs for staff members.Later, the committee appeared split along party lines, with the Democrats reserving their most pointed queries for Clemens, and the Republicans giving McNamee a rougher time. Chris Shays, a Connecticut Republican, likened the hearing to a "Roman Circus" featuring gladiators."I have never taken steroids or HGH," Clemens said after rising with McNamee to swear to tell the truth. "No matter what we discuss here today, I am never going to have my name restored."
For many, his denials rang hollow."It's hard to believe you, sir," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, a Maryland Democrat. "I hate to say that. You're one of my heroes. But it's hard to believe."McNamee's answers were generally quick and concise. His credibility also came under scrutiny."You're here under oath, and yet we have lie after lie after lie after lie," said Rep. Dan Burton, an Indiana Republican.When it was over, Clemens left the hearing room through a back door. Just before exiting, he paused to shake hands with Davis. Clemens later spoke briefly to reporters, saying: "I'm very thankful and very grateful for this day to come. I'm glad for the opportunity finally. And, you know, I hope I get -- and I know I will have -- the opportunity to come here to Washington again under different terms."Exactly two months after the Mitchell Report was released, Clemens and McNamee were separated by one seat in the same wood-paneled room where Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro saw their careers tarnished during a hearing in March 2005. In a reference to McGwire's evasions that day, Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., admonished Wednesday's witnesses by saying: "It's better not to talk about the past than to lie about the past."
Clemens briefly stared at McNamee, his former employee, during his accuser's opening statement, in which the trainer said he injected Clemens more times than he previously had said.Members of Congress questioned the credibility of both.Waxman -- who opened the proceedings by saying he thought this would be the last hearing his committee holds on baseball -- pointed out inconsistencies in Clemens' comments. Waxman also accused Clemens of possibly attempting to influence statements to the committee by the pitcher's former nanny.Burton repeatedly read remarks McNamee had made, and each time the former trainer was forced to admit they were untrue."This is really disgusting. You're here as a sworn witness. You're here to tell the truth," he said. "I don't know what to believe. I know one thing I don't believe and that's you."Cummings set the tone within minutes of the start, repeatedly reminding Clemens he was under oath and admonishing the pitcher to "keep your voice up."
McNamee was asked to pull his microphone closer.Debbie Clemens, the pitcher's wife, sat behind her husband and listened as Waxman implicated her in HGH use, citing statements by Pettitte. Later, Clemens read a statement from his wife and said she "has been broken up over this."IRS Special Agent Jeff Novitzky, a key member of the federal prosecution team against Barry Bonds, watched from a second-row seat. Asked why he was there, Novitzky declined comment.Bonds, baseball's home run king, was indicted in November on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice stemming from his 2003 testimony to a grand jury in which he denied knowingly using performance-enhancing drugs. Because of his denials under oath, Clemens could be subjected to a similar criminal probe. McNamee also could be referred to the Justice Department.
Pettitte, who was excused from testifying, said in a statement to the committee that Clemens admitted to him as long as 10 years ago that he used HGH. Waxman read from affidavits by Pettitte and Pettitte's wife, Laura, supporting the accusations."Andy Pettitte is my friend. He was my friend before this. He will be my friend after this and again. I think Andy has misheard," Clemens said. "I think he misremembers."McNamee told Mitchell that he injected Clemens 16 to 21 times with steroids and human growth hormone from 1998-01, and that Pettitte and Chuck Knoblauch used HGH. In his opening statement, McNamee said he might have injected Clemens and Knoblauch more than that."I have helped taint our national pastime," McNamee said. "Make no mistake: When I told Sen. Mitchell that I injected Roger Clemens with performance-enhancing drugs, I told the truth."Waxman said McNamee, a former New York City police officer, lied to police seven years ago during an investigation of a possible rape. He also was tough on Clemens."We have found conflicts and inconsistencies in Mr. Clemens' account.
During his deposition, he made statements that we know are untrue," Waxman said.In the affidavit, Pettitte said Clemens backtracked when the subject of HGH came up again in conversation in 2005, before the same House committee held the first hearing on steroids in baseball.Pettitte said in the affidavit that he asked Clemens in 2005 what he would do if asked about performance-enhancing substances. Pettitte said Clemens responded by saying Pettitte misunderstood the previous exchange in 1999 or 2000 and that, in fact, Clemens had been talking about HGH use by his wife in the original conversation.
Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Remote Class on an icy night...
Well, I never got both of our cars out of the driveway today. Serves me right for living in Winsted. But, at least we can all gather here around the warm computer screen for a while. I'm actually glad this worked out...because, as Gina mentioned, this is all turning to ice again soon.
I know some of you are going to be logging in a bit after 6:30. Please post a comment to this entry whenever you're around - so that I know we're all here. I'll give a brief outline of what we're doing first:
I'm posting the transcripts of the VOX interviews you guys did this past week. They'll be posted in their entirety. Now, I'm usually not one to do "fake" stories - those not grounded in reality. But, we'll make an exception. Treat these interviews as though they were done last Tuesday, as Connecticut voted in the primary. Clearly, not all of your interviewees voted...
Find 5 pertinent soundbites that you can shape into a VOX - running 1:00. Now, I know we don't have the timers that we do on the AP/ENPS system, but you can read the bites aloud to get an idea. So, what do we want in this VOX? Well, a variety of voices, opinions and ideas. We want it to be as balanced as possible (Not all pro-Ron Paul voters) and we want interesting responses. Once you have a script, post it in a "comment" to this blog post. Listen back to this VOX by Catie Talarski to get an idea of what we mean.
Please take about 30 minutes to do this...I'll post another assignment in a bit. Any questions? Post a comment, or email me at jkdankosky@quinnipiac.edu.
Transcripts are coming in one minute....
I know some of you are going to be logging in a bit after 6:30. Please post a comment to this entry whenever you're around - so that I know we're all here. I'll give a brief outline of what we're doing first:
I'm posting the transcripts of the VOX interviews you guys did this past week. They'll be posted in their entirety. Now, I'm usually not one to do "fake" stories - those not grounded in reality. But, we'll make an exception. Treat these interviews as though they were done last Tuesday, as Connecticut voted in the primary. Clearly, not all of your interviewees voted...
Find 5 pertinent soundbites that you can shape into a VOX - running 1:00. Now, I know we don't have the timers that we do on the AP/ENPS system, but you can read the bites aloud to get an idea. So, what do we want in this VOX? Well, a variety of voices, opinions and ideas. We want it to be as balanced as possible (Not all pro-Ron Paul voters) and we want interesting responses. Once you have a script, post it in a "comment" to this blog post. Listen back to this VOX by Catie Talarski to get an idea of what we mean.
Please take about 30 minutes to do this...I'll post another assignment in a bit. Any questions? Post a comment, or email me at jkdankosky@quinnipiac.edu.
Transcripts are coming in one minute....
VOX Transcriptions
Broadcast Journalism Student, who supports Ron Paul but didn’t register to vote.
Didn’t get his name on tape.
:10
Gina: Did you vote in the primary?
Journalism student: I’m actually not registered yet to vote. :15
Gina: Tell me about that.
Journalism student: :20 I’m just, I’m here usually so when I’m home, I’m working and I usually don’t have time to do that. :26
Gina: Are you registered to vote back home?
Journalism student: :28 Yes, I, I didn’t go home to vote, but if I did, I would have voted for Ron Paul. :31
Gina: Why is that?
Journalism student: :36
I just like what he has to say … all his ideas, he like, knows what he’s talking about. He doesn’t seem to just say it to make people like him. :42 He is just doing it because he knows, he thinks it’s right.”:45
:45
Gina: What year are you?
Journalism student: A sophomore.
Gina: And have you voted in past elections?
Journalism student: Not presidential, obviously, but in other ones.
Gina: What are you going to do in November?
Journalism student: Ah… I’m going to go home and vote, definitely, if I’m not, we’re probably not on break so I’ll go home and vote.1:02 I’m not sure who yet because Ron Paul won’t be around at that time. 1:06
Gina: Are you going to vote for McCain? 1:08
Journalism student: [[Ah…, maybe, I’ve got to see who he is running against. I’d vote for Obama over him, but not Clinton. I don’t like Clinton. 1:06]]
Gina: That’s kind of interesting, ideologically… so Obama or Ron Paul?
Journalism student: Yeah, those are my two.
Gina: Why those two sort of anti-establishment candidates?
Journalism student: [[1:26 I just sort of like what they have to say. They seem to know what they’re talking about. I like what their policies are on certain things. 1:34]]
Track 5: with Nicole, a Junior studying Occupational Therapy who voted for Hilary Clinton
Gina: So did you vote in the primary?
Nicole: Yes.
Gina: Do you mind if I ask, who did you vote for?
Nicole: :21 I voted for Hilary Clinton. :23
Gina: And why is that?
Nicole: :25 [[I just, I don’t know, (laugh) I liked what she stood for and I just felt like she was the most qualified.]] :32
Gina: Have you voted much in past elections?
Nicole: I didn’t vote because I wasn’t 18.
Gina: How did it feel voting in this election?
Nicole: Umn… it felt pretty good.
Gina: How did you feel about the outcome?
Nicole: :46 I don’t care, really. :50
Gina: Where are you from?
Nicole: I’m from Massachusetts. :54
Track 6: Dan Mackey, a freshman studying accounting
Gina: Did you vote in the Primary?
Dan: No I didn’t actually.
Gina: Why not?
Dan: :18 I didn’t really have enough time to get registered… just turned 18. :22
Gina: if you had… who do you think you might have voted for?
Dan: Probably McCain.
Gina: Why is that?
Dan: :31 ah… Republican reasons… laugh.:32
Gina: Like what sort of reasons are important? There are a lot of Republican candidates?
Dan: :37 [[Uh, I don’t know, mainly about the war I guess. I don’t agree with Obama, and especially not Hillary about their issues on the war. So, that’s basically….]] :46
Gina: How do you feel about Hillary?
Dan: :48 [[I don’t really know, I don’t, personally I don’t like her, mainly because of Bill Clinton and I know that he’s going to have a lot of influence on her so that’s basically how I feel about it.]] 1:00
Gina: How do you feel about McCain doing well now?
Dan: 1:03 [[I’m very happy actually. I’m happy that Hillary’s not ahead anyway. So hopefully it works out for the best. I guess…]] 1:11
Gina: So do you think you’ll be registered by November?
Dan: Yeah, definitely, when I go home, I’m going to. 1:17
Gina: Are you going to vote here?
Dan: I think I’m going to vote at home.
Gina: Where is that?
Dan: Long Island.
1. What is your name and where do or did you work?
My name is Barbara Sendroff and I worked at the law firm of Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. as a legal secretary.
2. Did you vote in the primary?
Yes.
3. Who did you vote for?
I voted for Barack Obama.
4. Why did you vote for Barack Obama?
I voted for Barack Obama because he is intelligent, enthusiastic and has a quiet strength about him. To me he represents hope and a new beginning for us. He is inclusive of all races, religions, ages, classes and ethnicities, bringing us together so that we can all work toward uniting our country together and moving our country forward to achieve healthcare, ending the war in Iraq, erasing poverty and becoming a positive role not only for ourselves, but for the world. I believe he is the best candidate to achieve these goals.
5. What is different in the primary this year in comparison with other years?
Two firsts – a woman running for President and an African American man running for President.
6. What is the surprise of 2008 Primary Presidential Election?
That so many people have become involved and got out to vote.
The second interview
1. What is your name and where do or did you work?
My name is Marc Allen and I worked for the Town of Hamden as the Bach Tax Collector.
2. Did you vote in the primary?
Yes, I voted.
3. Who did you vote for?
I voted for Barack Obama
4. Why did you vote for Barack Obama?
I voted for Obama because he has ignited a vision of hope and promise that has not existed for so long, and with his inclusiveness, and personality, may be able to translate those attributes into the change we so desperately need. Billary is old school, had their chance, and come with too much baggage.
5. What is different in the primary this year in comparison with other years?
That a woman and a black man are the candidates for the presidency. As a septuagenarian white male, I never in my life time imagined that this could occur.
6. What is the surprise of 2008 Primary Presidential Election?
The excitement, the enthusiasm, young people being brought into the process, the anticipation of how the remaining states will vote and decide the contest. Some of my cynicism is waning.
#1: Rick Coppola (GRAD)
MG: Did you vote in the Primary?
RC: I did not.
MG: Why not?
RC: I just got caught up in the day, I was intending on voting, but I didn’t have time, coming to work and school.
MG: If you had time, who would you have voted for?
RC: I don’t know. I don’t really identify with any political party, but I’m still undecided, still feeling my way out.
MG: Is there anybody you like in particular?
RC: I think I’m leaning more toward McCain at this point, but I still want to listen to some of the debates. We’ll see.
MG: Do you get the feeling that this year’s election is any more important than the last? Is there anything that makes it different to you?
RC: Well, I think your Democratic candidates, you know, one being a woman, the other being a black man, I think that’s particular of interest to the American people. And on the other side, you have a war veteran. There’s a lot of interesting personalities in the mix, and it’s starting to get heated now.
#2: Brittany Roy ’08
MG: Did you vote in the Primary?
BR: I did not.
MG: Why not?
BR: I’m out-of-state, and I didn’t register.
MG: If you could have voted, who would you have voted for?
BR: Oh man, I haven’t done my homework that well, but probably, right now, probably Hillary.
MG: Why?
BR: I like the idea of the medical [?]. I don’t know enough about the other candidates. I only know the most about her, and I think the media has definitely helped with that.
MG: Do you feel there’s anything different about this year’s election?
BR: I think it’s going to be the biggest election yet. It’s obviously the most important. We have a black president, we have a war veteran and a woman. I don’t think it gets any more controversial than that.
Joyce Chase, Meriden
Cory Peck: Who did you vote for?
JC: John McCain.
CP: I’m going to ask you why, but feel free not to answer.
JC: It’s more or less a gut reaction, uh, I agree with his politics, um. He is a war hero. I’m very conservative, he is conservative, although that is somewhat questionable. That’s probably about it.
CP: This year it kinda seems like there is more enthusiasm with this election, have you noticed anything different for yourself with this year’s presidential primary?
JC: It’s way too long. There’s too much fuss now where most of the emphasis really should be closer to November instead of now. But I suppose for those that are going to vote in the primary elections or head towards the conventions to decide who the delegate will be, I suppose that now is also an important time, but it’s very long and very tedious.
George Alexopoulos, Wallingford:
Cory Peck: So who did you vote for on Tuesday?
GA: Hillary
CP: Why?
GA: I like her. I’m a democrat and I just like her policy on healthcare and that whole thing.
CP: What feels different this year? Do you think the primary and the hype is different this year?
GA: I don’t know. People are very unhappy with what’s going on and the administration. It seems like people want change and that’s what it really feels like. I don’t think McCain is the answer or Huckabee. I don’t know it just seems like Hillary or Obama I think people would just like to see a change and why not just take a chance and see what happens? What do you have to lose? Look at what Bush did.
Interviewee 1: Greg Muccilli, Law school student
Did you vote in the primary?
Yes I did.
Who did you vote for and why?
I voted for John McCain. I voted for John McCain because I supported him back in 2000 and I think he’s probably one of the more honorable individuals running for president.
Have you voted in previous elections?
Yes.
Interviewee 2: Jonathon Kalsh, QU Campus Priest
Did you vote in the primary?
I did.
Who did you vote for and why?
I voted for, in the Republican primary, for John McCain. And um, I voted for him primarilyboth because of his pro life stance but also I think he’s the strongest candidate on the war on terror that we’re involved in right now, and I think he will continue to lead us to defend our nation and to protect us against radical Islam.
Did you vote in the last primary?
I believe so.
Didn’t get his name on tape.
:10
Gina: Did you vote in the primary?
Journalism student: I’m actually not registered yet to vote. :15
Gina: Tell me about that.
Journalism student: :20 I’m just, I’m here usually so when I’m home, I’m working and I usually don’t have time to do that. :26
Gina: Are you registered to vote back home?
Journalism student: :28 Yes, I, I didn’t go home to vote, but if I did, I would have voted for Ron Paul. :31
Gina: Why is that?
Journalism student: :36
I just like what he has to say … all his ideas, he like, knows what he’s talking about. He doesn’t seem to just say it to make people like him. :42 He is just doing it because he knows, he thinks it’s right.”:45
:45
Gina: What year are you?
Journalism student: A sophomore.
Gina: And have you voted in past elections?
Journalism student: Not presidential, obviously, but in other ones.
Gina: What are you going to do in November?
Journalism student: Ah… I’m going to go home and vote, definitely, if I’m not, we’re probably not on break so I’ll go home and vote.1:02 I’m not sure who yet because Ron Paul won’t be around at that time. 1:06
Gina: Are you going to vote for McCain? 1:08
Journalism student: [[Ah…, maybe, I’ve got to see who he is running against. I’d vote for Obama over him, but not Clinton. I don’t like Clinton. 1:06]]
Gina: That’s kind of interesting, ideologically… so Obama or Ron Paul?
Journalism student: Yeah, those are my two.
Gina: Why those two sort of anti-establishment candidates?
Journalism student: [[1:26 I just sort of like what they have to say. They seem to know what they’re talking about. I like what their policies are on certain things. 1:34]]
Track 5: with Nicole, a Junior studying Occupational Therapy who voted for Hilary Clinton
Gina: So did you vote in the primary?
Nicole: Yes.
Gina: Do you mind if I ask, who did you vote for?
Nicole: :21 I voted for Hilary Clinton. :23
Gina: And why is that?
Nicole: :25 [[I just, I don’t know, (laugh) I liked what she stood for and I just felt like she was the most qualified.]] :32
Gina: Have you voted much in past elections?
Nicole: I didn’t vote because I wasn’t 18.
Gina: How did it feel voting in this election?
Nicole: Umn… it felt pretty good.
Gina: How did you feel about the outcome?
Nicole: :46 I don’t care, really. :50
Gina: Where are you from?
Nicole: I’m from Massachusetts. :54
Track 6: Dan Mackey, a freshman studying accounting
Gina: Did you vote in the Primary?
Dan: No I didn’t actually.
Gina: Why not?
Dan: :18 I didn’t really have enough time to get registered… just turned 18. :22
Gina: if you had… who do you think you might have voted for?
Dan: Probably McCain.
Gina: Why is that?
Dan: :31 ah… Republican reasons… laugh.:32
Gina: Like what sort of reasons are important? There are a lot of Republican candidates?
Dan: :37 [[Uh, I don’t know, mainly about the war I guess. I don’t agree with Obama, and especially not Hillary about their issues on the war. So, that’s basically….]] :46
Gina: How do you feel about Hillary?
Dan: :48 [[I don’t really know, I don’t, personally I don’t like her, mainly because of Bill Clinton and I know that he’s going to have a lot of influence on her so that’s basically how I feel about it.]] 1:00
Gina: How do you feel about McCain doing well now?
Dan: 1:03 [[I’m very happy actually. I’m happy that Hillary’s not ahead anyway. So hopefully it works out for the best. I guess…]] 1:11
Gina: So do you think you’ll be registered by November?
Dan: Yeah, definitely, when I go home, I’m going to. 1:17
Gina: Are you going to vote here?
Dan: I think I’m going to vote at home.
Gina: Where is that?
Dan: Long Island.
1. What is your name and where do or did you work?
My name is Barbara Sendroff and I worked at the law firm of Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. as a legal secretary.
2. Did you vote in the primary?
Yes.
3. Who did you vote for?
I voted for Barack Obama.
4. Why did you vote for Barack Obama?
I voted for Barack Obama because he is intelligent, enthusiastic and has a quiet strength about him. To me he represents hope and a new beginning for us. He is inclusive of all races, religions, ages, classes and ethnicities, bringing us together so that we can all work toward uniting our country together and moving our country forward to achieve healthcare, ending the war in Iraq, erasing poverty and becoming a positive role not only for ourselves, but for the world. I believe he is the best candidate to achieve these goals.
5. What is different in the primary this year in comparison with other years?
Two firsts – a woman running for President and an African American man running for President.
6. What is the surprise of 2008 Primary Presidential Election?
That so many people have become involved and got out to vote.
The second interview
1. What is your name and where do or did you work?
My name is Marc Allen and I worked for the Town of Hamden as the Bach Tax Collector.
2. Did you vote in the primary?
Yes, I voted.
3. Who did you vote for?
I voted for Barack Obama
4. Why did you vote for Barack Obama?
I voted for Obama because he has ignited a vision of hope and promise that has not existed for so long, and with his inclusiveness, and personality, may be able to translate those attributes into the change we so desperately need. Billary is old school, had their chance, and come with too much baggage.
5. What is different in the primary this year in comparison with other years?
That a woman and a black man are the candidates for the presidency. As a septuagenarian white male, I never in my life time imagined that this could occur.
6. What is the surprise of 2008 Primary Presidential Election?
The excitement, the enthusiasm, young people being brought into the process, the anticipation of how the remaining states will vote and decide the contest. Some of my cynicism is waning.
#1: Rick Coppola (GRAD)
MG: Did you vote in the Primary?
RC: I did not.
MG: Why not?
RC: I just got caught up in the day, I was intending on voting, but I didn’t have time, coming to work and school.
MG: If you had time, who would you have voted for?
RC: I don’t know. I don’t really identify with any political party, but I’m still undecided, still feeling my way out.
MG: Is there anybody you like in particular?
RC: I think I’m leaning more toward McCain at this point, but I still want to listen to some of the debates. We’ll see.
MG: Do you get the feeling that this year’s election is any more important than the last? Is there anything that makes it different to you?
RC: Well, I think your Democratic candidates, you know, one being a woman, the other being a black man, I think that’s particular of interest to the American people. And on the other side, you have a war veteran. There’s a lot of interesting personalities in the mix, and it’s starting to get heated now.
#2: Brittany Roy ’08
MG: Did you vote in the Primary?
BR: I did not.
MG: Why not?
BR: I’m out-of-state, and I didn’t register.
MG: If you could have voted, who would you have voted for?
BR: Oh man, I haven’t done my homework that well, but probably, right now, probably Hillary.
MG: Why?
BR: I like the idea of the medical [?]. I don’t know enough about the other candidates. I only know the most about her, and I think the media has definitely helped with that.
MG: Do you feel there’s anything different about this year’s election?
BR: I think it’s going to be the biggest election yet. It’s obviously the most important. We have a black president, we have a war veteran and a woman. I don’t think it gets any more controversial than that.
Joyce Chase, Meriden
Cory Peck: Who did you vote for?
JC: John McCain.
CP: I’m going to ask you why, but feel free not to answer.
JC: It’s more or less a gut reaction, uh, I agree with his politics, um. He is a war hero. I’m very conservative, he is conservative, although that is somewhat questionable. That’s probably about it.
CP: This year it kinda seems like there is more enthusiasm with this election, have you noticed anything different for yourself with this year’s presidential primary?
JC: It’s way too long. There’s too much fuss now where most of the emphasis really should be closer to November instead of now. But I suppose for those that are going to vote in the primary elections or head towards the conventions to decide who the delegate will be, I suppose that now is also an important time, but it’s very long and very tedious.
George Alexopoulos, Wallingford:
Cory Peck: So who did you vote for on Tuesday?
GA: Hillary
CP: Why?
GA: I like her. I’m a democrat and I just like her policy on healthcare and that whole thing.
CP: What feels different this year? Do you think the primary and the hype is different this year?
GA: I don’t know. People are very unhappy with what’s going on and the administration. It seems like people want change and that’s what it really feels like. I don’t think McCain is the answer or Huckabee. I don’t know it just seems like Hillary or Obama I think people would just like to see a change and why not just take a chance and see what happens? What do you have to lose? Look at what Bush did.
Interviewee 1: Greg Muccilli, Law school student
Did you vote in the primary?
Yes I did.
Who did you vote for and why?
I voted for John McCain. I voted for John McCain because I supported him back in 2000 and I think he’s probably one of the more honorable individuals running for president.
Have you voted in previous elections?
Yes.
Interviewee 2: Jonathon Kalsh, QU Campus Priest
Did you vote in the primary?
I did.
Who did you vote for and why?
I voted for, in the Republican primary, for John McCain. And um, I voted for him primarilyboth because of his pro life stance but also I think he’s the strongest candidate on the war on terror that we’re involved in right now, and I think he will continue to lead us to defend our nation and to protect us against radical Islam.
Did you vote in the last primary?
I believe so.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
NPR v. The New York Times
NPR has been called (right or wrong) the "New York Times" of the radio...for many reasons, including the depth of the coverage, and the quality of the writing. For a sense of how two journalistic organizations - with very similar styles and missions - approach things from a print and broadcast point of view, here are some examples. They use a sad current story - the death of movie star Heath Ledger.
The Times' A.O. Scott writes about Ledger's career in today's paper. Scott is one of their film critics, and he takes it from a critic's point of view. The paper also ran several same-day news stories, including this one by James Barron.
NPR's online package includes two stories. One is by Kim Masters, who is "reporting" on the death - the other is by film critic Bob Mondello.
So, in reading (and listening) - what do you hear that's different? Can you tell the "broadcast" approach versus the "print" approach? Do you see the way they're using language differently?
Leave a comment for us to discuss...
The Times' A.O. Scott writes about Ledger's career in today's paper. Scott is one of their film critics, and he takes it from a critic's point of view. The paper also ran several same-day news stories, including this one by James Barron.
NPR's online package includes two stories. One is by Kim Masters, who is "reporting" on the death - the other is by film critic Bob Mondello.
So, in reading (and listening) - what do you hear that's different? Can you tell the "broadcast" approach versus the "print" approach? Do you see the way they're using language differently?
Leave a comment for us to discuss...
Basic rules, terminology...
One of the great mysteries of entering any new world is the terminology. In a broadcast newsroom, you can quickly be overwhelmed by the sheer volume of strange terms. I've made a list of some of the ones we'll be using most in class for you to refer to.
I've also outlined some basic rules for broadcast writing. It's not a complete list, and I'm sure we'll amend it throughout the semester. But, it's a good start.
I've also outlined some basic rules for broadcast writing. It's not a complete list, and I'm sure we'll amend it throughout the semester. But, it's a good start.
Spots, Features...
Here are some examples of the types of reporting we'll be doing this year...from the most basic, to the most complex. These stories are all centered around the basic broadcast writing rules of brief, but descriptive. The first piece is what we call a "spot." It's a short news story, with a lead paragraph written for the host, or "anchor" to read. It contains short "sound bites" or "actualities" within it. Heres' the script - click on the link to hear the story.
The State Legislature has gathered for a special session to enact criminal justice reform.
WNPR's Lucy Nalpathanchil reports.
State Legislature debates criminal justice reform spurred by Cheshire home invasion
The State Legislature has gathered for a special session to enact criminal justice reform.
Speaking on WNPR's Where We Live program, House Speaker James Amann says the Democratic majority and Governor Jodi Rell have reached a consensus on most issues in the reform proposal. Two sticking points remain, including disagreement between the Democrats and Republicans over a so-called, 3 strikes law that would send repeat violent offenders to prison for life. Amann says the problem with a 3 strikes law is that it would take away judicial discretion. But House Minority leader, Larry Cafero says the Republicans disagree with the need for flexibility when sentencing repeat violent offenders. He says the Governor has an idea that may help the Legislature reach a compromise.
Cafero: "That after 30 years that sentence should be reviewed, that is a compromise, a hybrid if you will as I've called it. And I think our caucus would certainly be willing to go along with that as well."
The special session was prompted by the deadly home invasion this past summer in Cheshire that killed 3 members of the Petit family. Two men have been charged with the crimes.
House Speaker Amann says the reform package includes investing money to improve technology and info-sharing between law enforcement agencies. Amann says this kind of investment could have prevented the Cheshire tragedy.
Amann: "The problem wasn't 3-strikes. The problem was information sharing, lack of sharing important data and information to Parole that probably would have kept these 2 individuals in jail."
The legislators are also trying to reach a compromise on how to label certain crimes so they fall under the definition of a violent offense. If the reform package is approved, the state could be spending up to an additional $25 million dollars in the next 2 years. For WNPR News, I'm Lucy Nalpathanchil.
You see the way Lucy wrote into those soundbites, making the story flow from her voice into that of the speaker. The whole piece is very short, only about two minutes, but still much longer than much of what you'll hear on commercial radio.
****************************************************
Now, here's a story that's different, and one that uses natural sound, or "ambience" to really put you IN a place. The reporter sets "scenes" that introduce you to the different speakers, and actively describe the place where they're talking. It's called "Many British Muslim Women Embrace Political Islam" by National Public Radio's Sylvia Poggioli. Go to this link to hear the story, and read along with the script they've provided. For the web, it's in "print form." Listen for the ways in which the broadcast version is different.
The State Legislature has gathered for a special session to enact criminal justice reform.
WNPR's Lucy Nalpathanchil reports.
State Legislature debates criminal justice reform spurred by Cheshire home invasion
The State Legislature has gathered for a special session to enact criminal justice reform.
Speaking on WNPR's Where We Live program, House Speaker James Amann says the Democratic majority and Governor Jodi Rell have reached a consensus on most issues in the reform proposal. Two sticking points remain, including disagreement between the Democrats and Republicans over a so-called, 3 strikes law that would send repeat violent offenders to prison for life. Amann says the problem with a 3 strikes law is that it would take away judicial discretion. But House Minority leader, Larry Cafero says the Republicans disagree with the need for flexibility when sentencing repeat violent offenders. He says the Governor has an idea that may help the Legislature reach a compromise.
Cafero: "That after 30 years that sentence should be reviewed, that is a compromise, a hybrid if you will as I've called it. And I think our caucus would certainly be willing to go along with that as well."
The special session was prompted by the deadly home invasion this past summer in Cheshire that killed 3 members of the Petit family. Two men have been charged with the crimes.
House Speaker Amann says the reform package includes investing money to improve technology and info-sharing between law enforcement agencies. Amann says this kind of investment could have prevented the Cheshire tragedy.
Amann: "The problem wasn't 3-strikes. The problem was information sharing, lack of sharing important data and information to Parole that probably would have kept these 2 individuals in jail."
The legislators are also trying to reach a compromise on how to label certain crimes so they fall under the definition of a violent offense. If the reform package is approved, the state could be spending up to an additional $25 million dollars in the next 2 years. For WNPR News, I'm Lucy Nalpathanchil.
You see the way Lucy wrote into those soundbites, making the story flow from her voice into that of the speaker. The whole piece is very short, only about two minutes, but still much longer than much of what you'll hear on commercial radio.
****************************************************
Now, here's a story that's different, and one that uses natural sound, or "ambience" to really put you IN a place. The reporter sets "scenes" that introduce you to the different speakers, and actively describe the place where they're talking. It's called "Many British Muslim Women Embrace Political Islam" by National Public Radio's Sylvia Poggioli. Go to this link to hear the story, and read along with the script they've provided. For the web, it's in "print form." Listen for the ways in which the broadcast version is different.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Welcome!
It's a new semester of JRN 521 "Writing for the Ear" - and I want to welcome you with an introductory blog post here on listeninglab.org.
We're primarily a broadcast news writing course - with audio production included. Here's a short handout to get you started writing "short and tight" - the way you'll need to for Radio & TV. Radio coach Valerie Geller contributed this very handy checklist of things to ask yourself:
How does this story affect my listener?
We're primarily a broadcast news writing course - with audio production included. Here's a short handout to get you started writing "short and tight" - the way you'll need to for Radio & TV. Radio coach Valerie Geller contributed this very handy checklist of things to ask yourself:
How does this story affect my listener?
- How can I describe things more visually?
- How can I make someone care about this?
- How is it that I'm putting this story on air?
- How can the presented problems be solved? What are the solutions?
- How did this happen? How could it have been prevented?
- How else can I tell this story?
- How would I tell it to a friend?
- How can I make it better?
- How would I tell it if my life depended on NOT losing a listener?
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Setting the scene
The "scene" in a broadcast report is an elusive thing, I've found. No matter how I try to describe it, it seems to be misunderstood. Perhaps what we can do is look at a scene for what it's NOT...
1. Random sound: A scene isn't the disconnected sound of the ocean, birds, a screaming car or an angry mob, just for the sake of hearing something. It's got to be described...to matter.
2. Anything outside an interview setting: While walking and talking in the great outdoors can actually be a scene, it's got to have purpose...why are we talking to this person there? What are they describing? If we take someone out of a studio and office and have them walk down the sidewalk for no reason, it will sound chaotic, disjointed...
Instead, here's what a scene IS...
1. A chance to hear something about a story that words alone can't convey. The sound of a bulldozer knocking down a building takes you there, in the way someone telling you a story about a bulldozer knocking down a building never could.
2. A chance to break up the narrative flow. If all we ever heard was: Reporter talks/Soundbite/Reporter/Soundbite/etc....it would get pretty boring. A scene lets you go elsewhere in the story...and really separates what we do from print reporting.
3. A chance to SHOW and not TELL. A scene should be constructed to create a visual image that shows you something about a person's life or character...about a situation or controversy.
Here are a few examples of scenes in radio stories. The first one's light...a story I did for NPR about a new rule in Connecticut high school football. This next story has at least one disturbing scene...Nancy Cohen reports on a broken sewage system.
1. Random sound: A scene isn't the disconnected sound of the ocean, birds, a screaming car or an angry mob, just for the sake of hearing something. It's got to be described...to matter.
2. Anything outside an interview setting: While walking and talking in the great outdoors can actually be a scene, it's got to have purpose...why are we talking to this person there? What are they describing? If we take someone out of a studio and office and have them walk down the sidewalk for no reason, it will sound chaotic, disjointed...
Instead, here's what a scene IS...
1. A chance to hear something about a story that words alone can't convey. The sound of a bulldozer knocking down a building takes you there, in the way someone telling you a story about a bulldozer knocking down a building never could.
2. A chance to break up the narrative flow. If all we ever heard was: Reporter talks/Soundbite/Reporter/Soundbite/etc....it would get pretty boring. A scene lets you go elsewhere in the story...and really separates what we do from print reporting.
3. A chance to SHOW and not TELL. A scene should be constructed to create a visual image that shows you something about a person's life or character...about a situation or controversy.
Here are a few examples of scenes in radio stories. The first one's light...a story I did for NPR about a new rule in Connecticut high school football. This next story has at least one disturbing scene...Nancy Cohen reports on a broken sewage system.
Public Radio News Directors Statement of Ethics
It's always good to have a philosophical, or ethical underpinning for the work you do. It helps to keep you grounded, and asking the right questions. That's why I share with you the "Statement of Ethics" from Public Radio News Directors Incorporated (PRNDI), the news organization I'm most closely aligned with. Everything here applies not just to this class...or to radio reporting specifically...but to journalism in general. You can find our more about PRNDI by clicking here.
STATEMENT OF ETHICS
Public Radio News Directors Inc. is committed to the highest standards of journalistic ethics and excellence. We must stand apart from pressures of politics and commerce as we inform and engage our listeners. We seek truth, and report with fairness and integrity.
Independence and integrity are the foundations of our service, which we maintain through these principles:
TRUTH
Journalism is the rigorous pursuit of truth. Its practice requires fairness, accuracy, and balance
We strive to be comprehensive. We seek diverse points of view and voices to tell the stories of our communities.
FAIRNESS
Fairness is at the core of all good journalism.
We gather and report the news in context, with clarity and compassion.
We treat our sources and the public with decency and respect.
Our reporting is thorough, timely and avoids speculation.
INTEGRITY
The public's faith in our service rests on our integrity as journalists.
Editorial independence is required to ensure the integrity of our work.
We identify the differences between reporting and opinion.
We guard against conflicts of interest - real and perceived - that could compromise the credibility and independence of our reporting.
We are accountable when conflicts occur. We disclose any unavoidable conflicts of interest.
STATEMENT OF ETHICS
Public Radio News Directors Inc. is committed to the highest standards of journalistic ethics and excellence. We must stand apart from pressures of politics and commerce as we inform and engage our listeners. We seek truth, and report with fairness and integrity.
Independence and integrity are the foundations of our service, which we maintain through these principles:
TRUTH
Journalism is the rigorous pursuit of truth. Its practice requires fairness, accuracy, and balance
We strive to be comprehensive. We seek diverse points of view and voices to tell the stories of our communities.
FAIRNESS
Fairness is at the core of all good journalism.
We gather and report the news in context, with clarity and compassion.
We treat our sources and the public with decency and respect.
Our reporting is thorough, timely and avoids speculation.
INTEGRITY
The public's faith in our service rests on our integrity as journalists.
Editorial independence is required to ensure the integrity of our work.
We identify the differences between reporting and opinion.
We guard against conflicts of interest - real and perceived - that could compromise the credibility and independence of our reporting.
We are accountable when conflicts occur. We disclose any unavoidable conflicts of interest.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Thompson makes illegal immigration issue once again
For those of you following illegal immigration as your "issue" story, some interesting news just out from one of the leading Republican candidates, actor Fred Thompson. I guess somebody DOES want to make this an issue...
As so often happens, one candidate decides to make a campaign statement, and now others need to keep up. Rudy Guliani's campaign was ready for Thompson's immigration plan ahead of time.
By the way, this David Greene piece on NPR gives a good example of political issue reporting.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Some interesting "issues" stories from Sunday papers...
...especially for those of you writing about religion or values issues.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports on how so-called "values" voters are approaching the 2008 election. Meanwhile, in the Washington Post, Rudy tells conservatives they have "nothing to fear" from him. The New York Times take on the "straw poll" of conservatives is that it raises more questions than it gives answers.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports on how so-called "values" voters are approaching the 2008 election. Meanwhile, in the Washington Post, Rudy tells conservatives they have "nothing to fear" from him. The New York Times take on the "straw poll" of conservatives is that it raises more questions than it gives answers.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
McLean Interview
Have a listen to Quinnipiac Poli-Sci professor Scott McLean talking about issues in the 2008 Presidential Election.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
First part of writing...the "vision"
Story "visioning" is an idea I heard about from a fantastic radio reporter named Melanie Peeples. In her training seminars she talks about this idea, which is really a more complex version of a story outline. Before we get into her visioning idea, let's listen to a recent political story she did for NPR, called Republican Leads Race for Louisiana Governor.
Here's the story visioning worksheet that Melanie has so generously allowed me to borrow from:
Here's the story visioning worksheet that Melanie has so generously allowed me to borrow from:
Questions for Story Visioning...before you start
- What is this story about?
- Who stands to win/lose in this story? Who are the stakeholders?
- What is my focus statement? (A short description, no longer than a few lines)
- Who do I need to interview: Side 1, Side 2, Real Person, Expert, etc.?
- What is this story REALLY about? What's underneath it all?
- Where should I interview the subjects? What does the place look like, how can I describe it?
- What questions should I ask?
- What more do I need to learn before I start working on this story?
Listening, and getting ready to write...
Writing for broadcast is really a two part process...what you write, and then how effectively you edit your own work. You should be a very critical editor at all times in the process, from when you first formulate a theme for your story, to just before you hand it over to another editor to get his or her take. So, it's a good idea to have a vision for your story...we'll go over that in a bit.
Before we get too deep into the idea of "story visioning" - it's important to know what to listen for in your own work, and in the works of others. You have a chance to model your work after a story you admire, and use some of the same techniques a favorite reporter uses. So, how to listen?
Here's a very handy guide to listening...it's called:
Before we get too deep into the idea of "story visioning" - it's important to know what to listen for in your own work, and in the works of others. You have a chance to model your work after a story you admire, and use some of the same techniques a favorite reporter uses. So, how to listen?
Here's a very handy guide to listening...it's called:
Questions for Listening
Courtesy Andrea DeLeon, National Public Radio
What is the specific focus of the piece...what's it about?
Did the piece make us care?
Are the stakeholders all here? Are their points balanced?
Is there too much information? Not enough?
Is the piece written for the ear...you know, to be listened to, not read?
Are there scenes in this piece? Visuals? Can you see what's going on?
How could more sound and more scenes improve this story?
Could it be made simpler?
Is the structure of this story the best it can be?
Ask yourself these questions as you listen to stories being told, and you'll be teaching yourself to think like an editor.
Talking about the issues....
At this early point in the 2008 presidential campaign, South Carolina's African-American voters get special attention from the Democratic presidential contenders. Churches, hair salons and barber shops are sure venues to stump for votes. NPR's Audie Cornish has this report.
President Bush’s popularity is still low in New Hampshire. According to the latest poll from the UNH Survey Center, only 29 percent of NH adults says they approve of the job the President is doing. How those numbers will translate into support for Republicans in the upcoming election is unclear. But a recent Wall Street Journal poll shows GOP backing within the business
community is eroding. And as New Hampshire Public Radio’s David Darman reports, many Republican business people in the Granite State are not happy with their choices.
President Bush’s popularity is still low in New Hampshire. According to the latest poll from the UNH Survey Center, only 29 percent of NH adults says they approve of the job the President is doing. How those numbers will translate into support for Republicans in the upcoming election is unclear. But a recent Wall Street Journal poll shows GOP backing within the business
community is eroding. And as New Hampshire Public Radio’s David Darman reports, many Republican business people in the Granite State are not happy with their choices.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Doug Schwartz Interview
Here is the interview that our "Writing for the Ear" graduate journalism class conducted with Quinnipiac Poll Director Doug Schwartz. So...
- What themes does he discuss that could make a good "issue" story about the 2008 Election.
- What "sound bites" or "actualities" does he give us that could help illustrate an expert point of view?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)