In addition to everything else he does, Krulwich now co-anchors public radio’s Radiolab, which this year won a prestigious George Foster Peabody Award for broadcast excellence. As the program explores science and technology, it’s also “rethinking and reinventing American radio,” says Ira Glass of “This American Life” in an appreciation of Radiolab posted at Transom.

Glass deconstructs how Krulwich and his co-host, Jad Abumrad, achieve their chatty on-air style that almost makes listeners feel they’re eavesdropping on an actual conversation instead of listening to a radio story.

They’ll come into the studio together with a script that’s halfway between a real script and a list of story beats they know they need to hit…They’ll ad lib their way through this so-called “script” a few times, rolling tape the whole time. Then Jad or one of the show’s producers cuts together a version. They listen to it. Then they’ll go back and re-record bits of banter, to make a quicker transition from one section to the next, or to slow down and explain some point more thoroughly, or to set up a piece of tape slightly differently. They’ll do this three or four times, jumping into the studio to make little improvements and adjusting as Jad and the other producers layer in the other production elements, the music and sound.

The result of all that effort is an effortless sound, with lots of back-and-forth between the co-anchors, as in the first story in this episode:

Glass notes that other public radio programs, like Planet Money, sometimes use a similar approach of having one reporter or anchor comment on another’s story. “Having two narrators lets them express amazement, underline what’s funny, manipulate the pacing, pause on a difficult idea and bring up opposing arguments in a very graceful way,” Glass writes.

Some commenters on Glass’s post say the presentation style he so admires feels contrived and forced. But I think he’s onto something:

TV news continually loses ratings. And one way we broadcast journalists can fight back and hold our audience is to sound like human beings on the air. Not know-it-all stiffs. One way the opinion guys kick our ass and appeal to an audience is that they talk like normal people, not like news robots speaking their stentorian news-speak. So I wish more broadcast journalism had such human narrators at its center. I think that would help fact-based journalism survive.

If you think public radio is a different beast and what they do there shouldn’t be tried in commercial newscasts, I beg to differ. Sure, Radiolab’s highly-produced techniques obviously would be difficult or maybe impossible to pull off live. But why shouldn’t TV anchors and reporters try a little harder to speak the way ordinary people talk?

Sourced from: NewsLab.

Like many ethical issues, the answer may be, “It depends.”  I think we can all think of situations in which using a tweet or FB comment would be newsworthy, but there are also plenty of gray areas, as Duffy suggests.

Of course, no matter the circumstances, one of the biggest concerns is identity verification.  Ever have your Facebook page hijacked by someone just playing a joke on you?  Unless my friends are highly unusual, I”d say it’s fairly common — especially among parents.

Is using social media “quotes” similar to overhearing someone talking at the next table in a restaurant and using those comments in a story?  Or does the fact that it’s “published” online make a difference?  Let us know what you think.

Nielsen tracked total audience — both on air and online — for the ABC affiliates in Seattle and Portland.  The researchers found that “each received at least a 3% bump in the 25-to-54 demo in the May 2011 sweeps period.”

So, at a time when audiences for the on air product may be shrinking, TV stations have an opportunity to make up for some of that loss with their online content.

Also, Web sites may be able to help stations reach more males. In Seattle, late local news viewership skewed 71% female. Yet a majority 53% of komonews.com users were male.

According to the story on mediapost.com, Nielsen is trying to expand its measurement of TV and online usage in local markets.

Gannett recruiter Virgil Smith says employers are looking for journalists who understand the technology and what the audience wants from a mobile device.

“From a writing standpoint, there’s the importance of writing stories that are shorter and more immediately compelling,” says Smith, “but still give the reader the opportunity to go get more on a website or in a printed product.”

Smith says journalists must be ready to adjust writing and other production skills to meet the needs of an evolving mobile environment.

“The fact is that 90% of Americans have some sort of mobile device and that’s going to grow,” Smith says. “Mobile phones more will get more and more sophisticated.”

Just this month, the Society of Professional Journalists launched a mobile newsgathering training module , which is available at low-cost to newsrooms and other journalism organizations.  The module focuses on using smart phones in the newsgathering and dissemination process.

The shift to mobile consumption is already affecting the production of news content, but Smith says the fundamentals remain critically important.

“The reporting skills and values of journalism – that should not change,” Smith says. “If anything that needs to be improved. Consumers rely on professional journalists to cut through clutter, to do good writing and good editing and provide clarity and truth regardless of method of consumption.”

1. The content is compelling.  Many people, including me, have entered into this debate and the student producer, Patrick Romero, used a simple point-counterpoint approach to shaping the story.

2.  The audio is audible.  If you read Advancing the Story, you know that we often make the point that good audio can save the day in a story, and poor audio can ruin a perfectly good visual piece.

3. Social media is powerful.  The video was produced as an assignment that the class watched on YouTube.  From there, students added the link to their Facebook pages and on the video went on to fame — including an airing on the CBS Morning News.

The story also had a tight focus, and engaging presenter and adequate production values. So given all this, can you make a video go viral? Or is it just luck that makes it happen?

Deciding what to leave out isn’t always easy, but you can start by following the excellent advice of Jennifer Nicole Sullivan, a copywriter for Real Simple magazine. On SPJ’s First Draft blog, Sullivan offers 12 edits to make everything fit.

Among her top tips:

Move information from your resume to your cover letter. Your job objectives and personal traits belong in the letter. Save room in the resume to summarize what you’ve done.

Leave information out, especially hobbies (unless they’re really relevant), anything from high school, and your grade point average. “Unless you have a 3.8 or higher, do not list your GPA,” Sullivan advises. “After your first professional job, omit it altogether.”

Don’t create a separate section for awards; list them with the job where you received them. And for goodness’ sake, write tight:

Use sentence fragments that begin with strong action verbs (no gerunds) to eliminate excess words and articles such as “the.” “I” is never needed.

Sullivan also suggests saving room by leaving references off your resume. Personally, I like seeing references listed, but if you can’t fit them in without spilling over to a second page, I suppose it’s OK to let them go.

What are the skills most often used by online journalists?  Topping the list in a recently published survey was…drum roll, please… writing or editing scripts.

Yes, in a poll of 49 online journalists, researchers Ryan Thornburg and Ying Roselyn Du asked practitioners to rank their daily duties from a list of 26 possibilities.

Here are their Top 10:

1. Writing or Editing Scripts

2. Project Management

3. Blogging

4. User Interface Design/Photo Shooting (tie)

6. Video Production

7. Staff Organization/Administration

8. Story Combining/Shortening

9. Reporting and Writing Original Stories

10. Photo/Image Editing

What’s interesting is how many basic multimedia journalism skills appear on the list.  Ranked last on the list of 26 duties was audio production and analyzing site usage metrics was second from the bottom.

Those working as online journalists were also given a list of concepts and asked which was most important on the job.  Number one was multitasking, followed by the ability to learn new technologies and attention to detail.

The research was published in the Autumn 2011 edition of Journalism & Mass Communication Educator.

“If you don’t really love doing it, you’re not going to do well,” she said in an NPPA interview. “It’s such a monster that you battle every day. You have to be so many things in a day.”

Here’s one of Michael’s prize-winning stories, a story that she says changed her life because “it showed me a lot about what people are willing to give up and do for other people.” It’s also an example of the value of listening. Michael says she met the man in the story when he demanded to see her ID as she entered a government building. She had to put down all her gear to find it. She wasn’t all that happy to see him again on her way out, but when he asked if she wanted to hear his story, she stopped long enough to hear what he had to say.

Michael does plenty of stories like that without a stand-up, but when she does decide to include one she spends a great deal of time setting up and shooting it. The result is often a multi-part stand-up, like the one in this story.

Did you count the number of shots in that stand-up? How long do you think it took Michael to get that done, working alone? Here’s the answer, in a behind-the-scenes look at how she produced that stand-up:

Thanks, Michelle Michael, for sharing your work and showing what it takes to do it well.

Sourced from: NewsLab

Stand-ups can be an effective way of explaining complicated issues or concepts, especially if you can find a simple analogy to illustrate the point. How does a retention pond work? Kind of like a coffee filter. Show-and-tell stand-ups can compensate for a lack of video. Where did the children first see the bear? Right here, next to this tree. These kinds of stand-ups aren’t for every story, every day, but used judiciously, they can help viewers make sense of difficult subjects.

They key word is “judiciously.”Joanne Stevens of Stevens Media Consulting says it’s important to remember that a stand-up is not all about you. “More and more I feel I’m being distracted by reporter stand-ups rather than being further edified about the story,” she writes on the RTDNA website.

You are not in a contest to bring back the most clever or viral standup. Ideally you can show us something interesting in your standup, or you may ‘just stand there’ and explain where you are and why it’s significant. You are on camera to communicate with us personally, not to assume the Shakespearean role of ‘I’m on TV and you’re not.’

Another way of adding visual interest to a longer stand-up is to shoot it in multiple takes. This allows you to walk your viewer through a complex process by illustrating individual steps in a visual sequence. Create a simple storyboard in advance to ensure that you’ll have everything you need for editing purposes.

Can you do this as a solo journalist? Absolutely. KUSA’s Kevin Torres does it all the time. The short stand-up in this package is made up of three shots, all framed differently:

“Try to add some natural sound in your stand-ups,” Torres suggests. “This helps break up the piece a lot and helps with the flow.”

Before you shoot any stand-up you need a clear idea of your story structure—not a complete script but a mental outline. Sometimes, it’s helpful to shoot more than one version in case that structure changes. But if you wind up with a stand-up that really doesn’t fit, resist the temptation to use it anyway. Then promise yourself that tomorrow, you’ll plan and execute a stand-up that really works.

Sourced from: NewsLab

“If a reporter puts too many twists, turns, or facts into a story, he risks obscuring its message,” Freedman writes in his book, It Takes More Than Good Looks to Succeed at Television News Reporting, now out in a new second edition and available online from the publisher.

In this excerpt, posted with permission, Freedman shares a case study that illustrates a key point: To improve your storytelling, write for your audience, not your bosses.

Not long ago, a reporter sent me samples of his work from a small market. He was twenty-three, still finding his way in his first job, and struggling. “I feel overwhelmed,” he wrote. Translated, that means he had a problem focusing.

The reporter’s clips included a late-news segment about a water main that cracked during a blizzard. Barring complications, a public works crew would replace the damage before the next morning’s rush hour. They did have one concern—that the leaking water might freeze into a sheet of ice and block a major intersection.

In a small city on a slow night, that water main break made big news. The broadcast producer asked our young reporter for a live shot with a package insert. After watching the segment, it was clear that he tried hard with his assignment. If possible, he tried too hard.

The reporter began with a montage of running water accompanied by a symphony of jackhammers. In painstaking detail, he explained how workmen poked holes in the cement and used a special listening device to locate leaks. He filled the piece with so many facts, figures, and obscurities that after a while, it began to look less like a news story, and more like an instructional video about street repair. If a viewer had watched closely, he might have been able to pass a civil service test.

All of the reporter’s problems trace back to one fundamental error. He never put himself in the place of the people at home. He forgot that most of them didn’t care about the specifics of urban street repair. They simply wanted to know when Public Works would fix the break, and if they would need to find alternate routes for the morning commute. The reporter could have given them that basic information in the first fifteen seconds of his live shot.

Then, if he had thought past the assignment sheet, he might have told a narrative story to which anyone might relate—that on a frigid night this crew faced a mean, nasty job. Between their numb fingers, the freezing mud, and the struggle to keep flowing water from turning into sheets of ice, he had dramatic ingredients for a piece with universal appeal.

“Why didn’t I think of that?” the kid asked later. Simple. We chalked it up to nerves and inexperience. He should have taken a figurative step back and trusted his natural curiosity. At that stage of his career, however, this young reporter didn’t have the confidence. He worried so much about missing an element that he overcompensated. Rather than errors of omission, he committed errors of congestion, and crammed too many facts into a ninety-second package.

Put simply, he allowed his fear to confine him.

This is a common mistake. Learn to recognize it, and you will be well on your way to fixing it. When you find yourself in a similar circumstance, whether reporting on politics, economics, science, the law, a union dispute, or some local problem like a broken water line, identify a single theme, storyline, or character, and stay true to it. Get to the point. Write for your viewers, not your bosses. Just because the alphabet begins with “A” and finishes with “Z,” do not feel obligated to detail all twenty-four letters in between.

The next time an assignment overwhelms your focus, that simple rule will help.

Many thanks to Wayne for sharing this excerpt. We have other writing tips from Wayne and a video here.

Sourced from: NewsLab